SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

GOVERNOR   OF  MASSACHUSETTS 


Copyright  by  Bachrach 


SAMUEL   W.  McCALL 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

GOVERNOR  OF  MASSACHUSETTS 


BY 


LAWRENCE  B.  EVANS 

OF   THE    MASSACHUSETTS    BAR 


With  Illustrations 


HOUGHTON    MIFFLIN   COMPANY 
BOSTON    AND    NEW  YORK    1916 


' 


COPYRIGHT,   1916,   BY   LAWRENCE   B.  EVANS 
ALL  RIGHTS   RESERVED 

Published  April  iqib 


*•>..* 


PREFACE 

THE  notable  career  of  Mr.  McCall,  extend 
ing  over  more  than  a  generation,  is  a  sufficient 
excuse  for  this  biography.  As  a  member  of  Con 
gress  he  was  a  participant  in  several  of  the  most 
important  discussions  of  questions  of  govern 
mental  policy  which  have  ever  occurred  in  our 
history,  and  his  utterances,  both  spoken  and 
written,  were  based  upon  such  extensive  knowl 
edge  and  were  characterized  by  such  logic  of 
thought  and  fitness  of  literary  expression  as  will 
insure  them  a  high  place  in  our  political  litera 
ture.  In  the  preparation  of  this  book  I  have 
made  large  use  of  them  and  have  embodied  nu 
merous  extracts  from  them  in  the  narrative. 

It  is  a  distinguishing  feature'of  Mr.  McCall's 
speeches  in  Congress  that  for  the  most  part  they 
deal  with  subjects  of  permanent  importance  and 
continuing  interest.  No  public  man  of  the  pres 
ent  generation  has  been  more  earnest  in  his  de 
fense  of  the  principle  of  our  system  of  distributed 
power.  On  the  one  hand  he  stands  for  the  largest 
measure  of  individual  freedom,  and  against  that 
undue  centralization  of  governmental  power  at  a 
single  'point  which  is  so  destructive  of  freedom ; 
but  on  the  other  hand,  in  his  liberal  interpreta- 


PREFACE 

tion  of  the  power  of  the  Federal  Government 
and  in  his  opposition  to  measures  which  would 
hamper  it  in  the  execution  of  the  functions  which 
have  been  committed  to  it  he  belongs  to  the 
school  of  Marshall.  When  economic  and  social 
conditions  in  the  country  so  change  as  to  make 
alterations  in  the  fundamental  law  advisable,  he 
is  ready  to  meet  the  new  situation,  as  was  shown 
by  his  introduction  of  an  amendment  to  the  Con 
stitution  empowering  Congress  to  enact  laws  pro 
viding  for  uniform  hours  of  labor. 

In  reproducing  extracts  from  the  "  Congres 
sional  Record  "  I  have  been  in  some  doubt  as  to 
whether  I  ought  to  retain  the  reporter's  indica 
tions  of  "  Laughter"  and  "Applause."  Since, 
however,  it  was  not  Governor  McCall's  custom 
to  revise  his  remarks  for  publication,  as  is  done 
by  some  members  who  insert  these  indications 
of  approval  at  points  where  in  their  judgment 
their  hearers  should  have  risen  to  the  occasion, 
I  have  concluded  to  let  them  stand.  They  are  a 
part  of  the  story  and  as  such  have  some  historic 
value.  I  am  the  more  ready  to  do  this  since  I 
find  that  Governor  McCall  himself  adopted  this 
practice  in  his  life  of  Speaker  Reed. 

LAWRENCE  B.  EVANS. 

701  BARRISTERS  HALL,  BOSTON, 
April  19,  1916. 


CONTENTS 

I.    CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL  I 

II.    TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION  47 

III.  CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS  78 

IV.  THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION  I  15 
V.    THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS       145 

VI.    THE    PRESIDENCY    OF     DARTMOUTH 

COLLEGE  172 

VII.    THE  MAN  OF  LETTERS  1 89 

VIII.    MR.  MCCALL  217 


ILLUSTRATIONS 

SAMUEL  W.  McCALL  Frontispiece 

From  a  photograph  by  Bachrach 

SAMUEL  W.   McCALL  AT  THE  AGE  OF  ELEVEN  8 

MR.  McCALL  AT  NINETEEN  12 

MRS.  MCCALL  218 

From  a  photograph  by  Henry  Havelock  Pierce 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

CHAPTER   I 

CHIEFLY   BIOGRAPHICAL 

IN  the  early  annals  of  Pennsylvania,  the  name 
of  McCall  occupies  a  conspicuous  place.  The 
identity  of  the  enterprising  immigrant  of  the  Mc 
Call  clan  who  deserted  Scotland  in  order  to  try 
his  fortune  in  the  province  of  William  Penn  is 
not  known,  but  the  stock  made  a  lasting  impres 
sion  in  its  new  home.  Peter  McCall  was  a  Jus 
tice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania  and 
Mayor  of  Philadelphia.  Samuel  McCall,  Jr.,  was 
associated  with  Benjamin  Franklin  as  one  of  the 
incorporators  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania. 
Whether  these  men  were  members  of  Governor 
McCall's  family  cannot  be  determined,  but  the 
population  of  the  colony  was  small,  and  the  name 
of  McCall  was  not  a  common  one.  Hence  it  is 
probable  that  all  the  McCalls  of  Pennsylvania 
were  kinsmen. 

Among  those  who  fell  at  Brandywine  in  the 
War  for  Independence  was  Governor  McCall's 
great-grandfather,,  who  left  a  son,  William,  then 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

seven  years  of  age.  In  spite  of  being  thus  early 
deprived  of  a  father's  care,  the  son  grew  and  pros 
pered,  and  his  death,  at  the  ripe  age  of  ninety- 
five,  was  partly  due  to  an  accident.  He  took  to 
wife  a  woman  of  that  sturdy  stock  known  as 
Pennsylvania  Dutch,  and  her  portrait,  made 
late  in  life,  shows  that  her  distinguished  grand 
son  closely  resembles  her.  One  of  the  children 
of  this  marriage  was  Henry  McCall,  who  was 
born  in  1808.  He  married  Mary  Ann  Elliott, 
whose  father,  Ennion  Elliott,  was  High  Sheriff 
of  his  county.  Old  residents  of  Chambersburg, 
the  shire  town,  were  long  in  the  habit  of  relating 
stories  of  his  industry  in  politics.  Early  in  the 
morning  he  would  set  out  on  horseback  equipped 
with  saddlebags,  and  canvass  the  voters  of  his 
county.  His  wife,  Susan  Carver,  who  was  a  na 
tive  of  Maryland,  lived  to  be  almost  ninety-nine 
years  of  age.  In  fact,  Governor  McCall  came  of 
unusually  vigorous  ancestry,  since  the  average 
age  of  his  four  grandparents  was  about  ninety. 

Henry  McCall  and  his  wife  were  the  parents 
of  eleven  children  —  seven  sons  and  four  daugh 
ters.  The  sixth  in  order  in  this  goodly  company 
was  Samuel  Walker  McCall,  who  was  born  at 
East  Providence,  Pennsylvania,  February  28, 
1851.  When  he  was  two  years  old,  his  father  was 
attracted  by  the  opportunities  offered  by  the 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

newer  communities  west  of  the  Alleghanies,  and 
he  therefore  abandoned  Pennsylvania  and  jour 
neyed  down  the  Ohio  River  from  Pittsburg  to 
Cairo  and  thence  up  the  Mississippi  to  Mount 
Carroll,  Illinois,  —  a  town  not  far  from  the  Wis 
consin  line.  Here  he  established  his  home.  He 
was  a  well-to-do  man  for  those  days,  as  may  be 
seen  from  the  fact  that  he  carried  with  him  from 
Pennsylvania  between  eight  and  nine  thousand 
dollars  in  gold.  He  invested  in  large  tracts  of 
land,  which  could  then  be  bought  almost  at  gov 
ernment  prices,  and  also  engaged  in  the  manu 
facture  of  stoves,  ploughs,  and  other  machinery 
for  the  farmers.  In  this  enterprise  he  was  quite 
successful,  but  his  credits  were  so  extensive  that 
the  panic  of  1857-58,  which  was  the  result 
largely  of  Buchanan's  tariff  policy,  compelled 
him  to  close  his  factory.  The  county  was  then 
without  a  railroad,  and  the  men  who  owned  land 
very  generally  mortgaged  it  in  order  to  secure 
the  construction  of  a  road.  The  enterprise  failed, 
and  the  farmers  who  had  mortgaged  their  land 
were  compelled  to  take  subscriptions  for  stock 
which  was  wholly  worthless  or  to  surrender  their 
land.  In  common  with  the  other  people  of  the 
county  Henry  McCall  suffered  heavy  losses  in 
this  way.  Shortly  after  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil 
War,  he  moved  upon  a  farm  near  Mt.  Carroll, 

3 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

and  in  this  undertaking  he  prospered  greatly  and 
did  much  to  restore  his  fortunes.  It  was  doubt 
less  his  father  whom  Governor  McCall  had 
in  mind  when,  in  one  of  his  early  campaigns 
for  Congress,  he  said  in  reply  to  his  opponents, 
who  dwelt  much  upon  the  fact  that  their  nomi 
nee  was  a  son  of  John  A.  Andrew,  the  great 
War  Governor  of  Massachusetts:  — 

With  reference  to  this  question  of  fathers,  I  have  to 
say  that  we  are  not  consulted  in  the  matter.  It  may  be 
a  fine  thing  to  have  a  distinguished  governor  for  a  father. 
I  think,  however,  that  some  of  us  would  not  swap  the 
fathers  that  nature  gave  us  for  all  the  war  governors  in 
the  world. 

The  free  and  open  life  upon  the  Illinois  farms 
during  the  middle  decades  of  the  nineteenth  cen 
tury  made  a  profound  impression  upon  the  young 
boy  Samuel.  His  father  kept  a  large  number  of 
horses,  and  young  Sam  was  frequently  seen  upon 
a  horse  usually  without  a  saddle  and  sometimes 
without  a  bridle  taking  long  rides  over  the  al 
most  unbroken  prairies.  The  contest  with  the 
primitive  forces  of  nature  was  still  on.  The  In 
dian  wars  were  close  to  them  both  in  time  and 
space.  Towns  were  few  and  small.  Government 
was  not  much  in  evidence.  Men  were  subject  to 
little  law  except  "the  natural  law  which  is  in  one's 
own  heart."  Years  afterward  Mr.  McCall  spoke 
4 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

with  deep  feeling  of  his  recollection  of  his  prairie 
home:  — 

There  were  neighbors  on  one  side  of  us,  and  a  great 
open  prairie  on  the  other.  The  fragrance  of  the  wild 
flowers,  roses  among  the  rest,  is  with  me  yet.  Bare 
footed,  I  walked  through  the  native  grass,  which  was 
so  tall  that  it  reached  to  my  neck.  I  saw  blue-racers 
and  now  and  then  passed  the  brown  nest  of  a  prairie 
chicken,  which  I  only  discovered  when  the  hen  rose 
behind  me  and  beat  a  tattoo  of  retreat  with  her  wings. 
The  air  was  as  transparent  as  plate  glass  and  full  of 
tonic  and  sunlight.  I  have  loved  the  prairies  ever  since, 
but  they  are  gone  with  some  of  the  other  joys  of  my 
boyhood.  Now,  if  one  goes  to  a  sparsely  settled  region, 
he  finds  mountains,  arid  plains  or  forests. 

It  was  doubtless  due  to  the  happy  memories 
of  this  period  of  his  life  and  to  his  actual  knowl 
edge  of  the  conditions  under  which  farmers  live 
that  later  he  became  so  impatient  with  the  whining 
tone  often  assumed,  particularly  in  legislative 
bodies,  by  self-appointed  spokesmen  of  the  farm 
ing  interest.  In  a  speech  delivered  in  Congress 
in  191 1  he  said:  — 

According  to  his  eulogists  here,  the  American  farmer 
is  a  very  serious-minded  individual,  with  his  wife  and 
numerous  progeny  gathered  about  him  —  and  I  observe 
that  these  eulogists  usually  bless  him  with  a  bountiful 
offspring —  desperately  and  with  great  solemnity  endeav 
oring  to  cling  to  a  precarious  existence.  These  orators 

5 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

lament  over  his  rugged  qualities,  they  almost  brood  over 
his  virtues,  and  as  for  his  faults,  he  has  none,  for  he  is 
a  being  to  whom  it  is  impossible  to  sin. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  have  had  some  experience  with  the 
American  farmer.  I  have  seen  him  in  his  native  lair. 
It  was  my  great  good  fortune  to  live  for  a  number  of 
years  in  my  boyhood  upon  one  of  those  glorious  farms 
in  northwestern  Illinois  —  a  $2OO-an-acre  farm,  as  the 
gentleman  from  Indiana  called  it  —  one  of  those  prairie 
farms,  not  the  flat  farms  that  you  have  farther  to  the  west, 
but  where  you  have  the  billows  of  the  prairie  tumbling 
about  you.  One  of  those  farms  which,  when  they  are 
under  cultivation,  present  a  scene  of  pastoral  beauty  and 
of  fertility  such  as  can  scarcely  be  found  anywhere  in  the 
world.  I  have  seen  farmers  actually  burn  corn  for  fuel,  as 
has  been  so  dramatically  stated  in  this  debate.  Why,  it  has 
been  presented  here,  as  if  it  showed  the  destitution  of 
the  American  farmer  and  his  straitened  circumstances, 
that  he  actually  burned  corn  for  fuel.  I  have  seen  him 
burn  corn.  Sometimes  he  would  overcrop  with  one  grain 
and  could  not  sell  it  profitably,  but  he  was  pretty  sure 
to  get  even  on  some  other  grain ;  and  instead  of  brood 
ing  over  the  burning  of  corn,  more  probably  the  farmer 
would  sit  cheerily  smoking  his  pipe  in  the  light  of  its 
blazing  fire  and  his  sons  would  rejoice  that  they  did  not 
have  to  chop  wood.  [Laughter  and  applause.] 

The  American  farmer  is  not  the  sad-eyed  monstros 
ity,  always  staring  destiny  in  the  face,  that  we  have  had 
painted  here.  The  farmers,  as  I  knew  them,  were  a 
prosperous,  independent,  and  happy  race  of  men.  I  have 
known  many  farmers,  and  I  have  known  some  men  even 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

on  Wall  Street,  and  I  have  made  up  my  mind  that  they 
both  belong  to  the  same  race,  and  that  there  is  about 
as  much  human  nature  in  the  one  class  as  in  the  other. 
I  have  sometimes  thought  that  if  the  numbers  were  re 
versed  and  that  if  we  had  five  million  voters  on  Wall 
Street  and  only  a  few  hundred  farmers,  our  statesmen 
would  sing  the  homely  virtues  of  J.  P.  Morgan  and  his 
crew  and  would  bestow  upon  them  some  of  those  lugu 
brious  eulogiums  of  which  the  American  farmer  has 
been  so  long  the  patient  victim.  [Applause  and  laugh 
ter.]  And  their  worst  enemy  could  hardly  wish  them  a 
harder  fate. 

Mr.  McCall  was  but  ten  years  old  when  the 
Civil  War  broke  out  —  too  young  to  participate 
in  it,  but  old  enough  to  be  profoundly  impressed 
by  it.  That  impression  was  made  all  the  deeper 
by  the  fact  that  two  of  his  brothers  enlisted  in 
the  army,  and  the  family  was  thus  brought  into 
direct  personal  contact  with  the  struggle.  His 
interest  in  the  war  was  further  enhanced  by  the 
proximity  of  the  two  great  leaders  in  the  contest, 
Lincoln  and  Grant,  who  were  in  a  sense  his  neigh 
bors.  During  the  most  receptive  years  of  his  life, 
therefore,  he  was  daily  in  the  presence  of  events 
which  confirmed  and  strengthened  a  natural  in 
terest  in  public  affairs. 

Mr.  McCall's  education  was  begun  in  the  pub 
lic  schools  of  Illinois,  but  in  1864  he  entered  the 
Mt.  Carroll  Seminary,  a  boarding-school  for  both 

7 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

boys  and  girls,  which,  however,  about  a  year  and 
a  half  later  was  converted  into  a  school  for  girls, 
and  its  male  attendants  were  compelled  to  seek 
educational  advantages  elsewhere.  From  one  of 
their  neighbors  who  came  from  New  Hampshire, 
the  boy  Samuel  had  heard  of  an  academy  situ 
ated  at  New  Hampton,  New  Hampshire,  and  he 
was  so  impressed  by  what  was  told  him  that  he 
persuaded  his  father  to  send  him  to  that  institu 
tion.  Early  one  Monday  morning  he  was  put  upon 
a  train  and  started  for  New  Hampshire.  That  was 
a  long  journey  in  those  days,  and  especially  for 
a  boy  who  had  never  traveled  -  alone  more  than 
twenty-five  miles  from  home.  After  running  off 
the  track  and  experiencing  other  adventures,  he 
arrived  at  the  school  the  following  Friday  night. 
Thus  began,  in  1867,  his  long  connection  with 
New  England. 

The  contrast  between  the  physical  aspect  of 
New  England  and  the  prairies  of  Illinois  made 
a  strong  impression  upon  his  mind.  In  the  speech 
to  which  reference  has  already  been  made  he 
said:  — 

I  not  only  saw  agriculture  in  the  West,  but  when  I 
was  a  young  boy  my  father  sent  me  to  New  England 
to  school,  and  I  had  an  opportunity  there  to  see  how 
they  farmed  in  New  England.  In  the  West  a  farmer 
could  turn  a  furrow  for  a  mile,  if  his  farm  went  that 
8 


SAMUEL   W.   McCALL 
AT  THE  AGE  OF   ELEVEN 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

far,  without  taking  his  hand  from  the  plough;  but  in 
New  England  the  farmer  would  urge  his  horse,  and 
more  often  his  oxen,  for  a  few  feet  and  then  would  have  to 
turn  out  for  a  stump  or  stone.  [Laughter.]  He  would 
try  to  select  smooth  little  patches  upon  the  hillside. 
While  a  New  England  hillside,  with  its  alternation  of 
little  rye-fields  and  corn-fields  and  pasture  and  meadow 
and  woodland,  presents  a  very  beautiful  mosaic  to  the 
eye,  it  certainly  is  not  favorable  to  agriculture.  [Laugh 
ter.]  And  it  was  inevitable  that  under  the  adverse 
natural  conditions  and  with  the  antiquated  methods 
which  the  New  England  farmers  employed  they  could 
not  compete  with  the  rich  and  fertile  prairie  lands  of 
the  West. 

Mr.  McCall  remained  in  the  academy  at  New 
Hampton  three  years.  The  instruction  in  that 
institution  was  unusually  good.  His  teacher  in 
Latin  and  Greek  was  George  C.  Chase,  later  Presi 
dent  of  Bates  College,  whom  Mr.  McCall  regards 
as  one  of  the  very  best  teachers  he  has  ever  known. 
In  mathematics  he  had  Professor  Rand,  who  for 
many  years  was  head  of  the  Department  of  Mathe 
matics  in  Bates  College.  Dr.  Meservey,  the  princi 
pal  of  the  academy,  an  author  of  books  and  a  fa 
mous  teacher  in  his  day,  gave  instruction  in  science. 
On  Mr.  McCall's  graduation  from  the  academy 
in  1870,  he  was  made  valedictorian  of  his  class. 
The  following  autumn  he  entered  Dartmouth 
with  the  Class  of  1874. 

9 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

A  knowledge  of  the  classics  and  mathematics 
was  not  the  only,  or  even  the  chief,  acquisition 
which  Mr.  McCall  made  at  the  New  Hampton 
Academy.  One  of  his  fellow  students  at  that 
institution  was  Miss  Ella  Esther  Thompson, 
who  in  1 88 1  became  Mrs.  McCall.  She  was  the 
daughter  of  Sumner  Shaw  Thompson,  a  native 
of  Plymouth  County,  Massachusetts,  where  his 
ancestors  had  resided  ever  since  the  landing  of 
the  Mayflower.  His  business  interests  took  him 
to  Vermont  where  he  established  his  home  and 
made  a  reputation  as  a  man  of  large  affairs,  extend 
ing  far  beyond  the  boundaries  of  his  State.  He 
achieved  a  remarkable  success  as  a  business  man, 
being  identified  with  the  construction  of  railroads 
from  his  boyhood  and  becoming  one  of  the  best- 
known  railroad  builders  of  his  time.  He  was  also 
a  banker  and  had  large  interests  in  timber  lands 
in  Vermont  and  Michigan.  He  left  a  well-earned 
fortune  which  might  have  been  much  larger  ex 
cept  for  his  generous  giving.  He  was  a  Repub 
lican  in  politics,  and,  while  reluctant  to  hold  office, 
was  called  upon  at  different  times  to  render  impor 
tant  public  service.  His  wife,  Harriet  Stark  Wiley, 
was  from  Maine,  and  through  her  Mrs.  McCall  is 
related  to  Admiral  Peary.  While  Mr.  McCall  was 
in  Congress,  he  was  invited  to  speak  on  Fore 
fathers'  Day  before  the  New  England  Society  of 
10 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

Philadelphia,  and  was  introduced  to  the  audience 
as  a  real  Yankee  from  New  England.  He  some 
what  surprised  his  hearers  by  saying  that  he  was 
probably  the  only  person  present  who  was  a  na 
tive  of  Pennsylvania.  In  speaking  of  the  matter 
afterward,  he  said  that  they  were  somewhat  dis 
concerted  when  they  found  that  he  had  never 
seen  New  England  until  he  was  sixteen  years  old. 
But  they  were  reconciled  to  the  situation  when 
he  told  them  that  he  had  married  a  Mayflower 
descendant;  and  as  he  and  Mrs.  McCall  were  the 
parents  of  five  children,  he  could  claim  to  be 
literally  one  of  the  "Pilgrim  Fathers." 

In  the  autumn  of  1870  Mr.  McCall  began  his 
studies  in  Dartmouth  College.  From  his  early 
boyhood  he  had  been  strongly  attracted  by  Dan 
iel  Webster,  and  his  mind  first  turned  toward 
Dartmouth  because  that  was  Webster's  college. 
He  was  unusually  well  fitted,  and  this,  together 
with  the  ease  with  which  he  learned,  enabled  him 
to  take  high  rank,  especially  in  the  classics.  At 
graduation  he  was  elected  to  Phi  Beta  Kappa,  and 
according  to  the  method  of  ranking  used  by  that 
society,  he  stood  second  in  his  class  which  num 
bered  a  little  more  than  sixty.  Among  his  class 
mates  who  have  since  become  well  known  were 
John  A.  Aiken,  Chief  Justice  of  the  Superior  Court 
of  Massachusetts ;  Edwin  G.  Eastman,  for  twenty 

ii 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

years  Attorney  General  of  New  Hampshire; 
Homer  P.  Lewis,  Superintendent  of  Schools  of 
Worcester,  Massachusetts ;  Frank  N.  Parsons, 
Chief  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  New 
Hampshire ;  Samuel  L.  Powers,  ex-member 
of  Congress  from  Massachusetts ;  Charles  E. 
Quimby,  a  prominent  physician  in  New  York ; 
and  General  Frank  S.  Streeter,  a  leading  mem 
ber  of  the  bar  of  New  Hampshire. 

Although  Mr.  McCall  took  high  rank  as  a 
student  he  also  found  time  for  other  activities. 
He  was  a  member  of  Kappa  Kappa  Kappa,  a 
strong  local  society  established  in  opposition  to 
the  intercollegiate  fraternities.  He  was  also  much 
interested  in  debating.  It  was  in  his  junior  year 
that  boating  was  introduced  as  a  college  sport. 
For  some  time  there  had  been  a  regular  college 
regatta  on  the  Connecticut  River  at  Springfield, 
in  which  nearly  all  the  New  England  colleges 
participated.  Dartmouth  decided  to  join  this 
association,  and  formed  a  boat  club  of  which  Mr. 
McCall  was  in  turn  vice-president  and  president. 
In  his  senior  year  he  had  charge  of  the  Dart 
mouth  crew  in  the  intercollegiate  regatta  which 
that  year  was  held  at  Saratoga.  After  his  gradua 
tion  he  was  made  a  member  of  the  graduate  com 
mittee  of  three  chosen  by  all  the  colleges  in  the 
association  and  which  had  charge  of  the  regatta. 

12 


SAMUEL    W.    McCALL 
AT  THE   AGE  OF    NINETEEN 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

In  the  work  of  this  committee  he  showed  that  in 
dependence  of  judgment  which  has  been  so  char 
acteristic  of  him  throughout  his  life.  The  major 
ity  of  the  committee  recommended  that  the  next 
regatta  be  held  at  Saratoga,  which  was  then  a 
notorious  gambling  center,  and  this  recommen 
dation  was  adopted.  Mr.  McCall  dissented  and 
brought  in  a  minority  report  in  favor  of  New 
London.  "  So  you  see  I  began  my  career  as  a 
kicker  and  I  have  kept  it  up  ever  since." 

As  a  student  Mr.  McCall  was  also  much  in 
terested  in  college  journalism.  Some  members 
of  the  Class  of  1 873  established  the  "  Dartmouth 
Anvil,"  and  Mr.  McCall  and  some  of  his  class 
mates  were  invited  to  seats  on  the  editorial  board. 
In  his  senior  year,  he  became  editor-in-chief  of 
the  paper,  and  among  his  associates  were  three 
men  now  known  as  Chief  Justice  Aiken,  Chief 
Justice  Parsons,  and  ex-Congressman  Powers. 
In  its  general  plan  the  "  Dartmouth  Anvil  "  was 
quite  different  from  the  current  type  of  college 
paper.  At  present  such  a  paper  is  expected  to 
give  the  news  of  the  college  circle,  but  no  effort 
is  made  to  chronicle  the  happenings  of  the  outer 
world.  But  in  the  "  Dartmouth  Anvil  "  there 
was  little  in  the  character  of  its  news  to  indicate 
that  it  was  a  college  paper.  Any  other  paper  pub 
lished  in  Hanover  might  have  been  expected  to 

'3 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

give  as  much  attention  to  college  affairs  as  did 
the  "  Anvil."  In  the  main  it  was  made  up  of 
the  local  news  of  Hanover  and  near-by  towns, 
excellent  summaries  of  the  news  of  the  world  at 
large,  able  reviews  of  new  books  and  extended 
editorials  on  the  important  happenings  of  the 
day.  It  was  all  treated,  however,  from  the  stand 
point  of  a  college  student  and  was  pervaded  with 
the  tang  of  college  life.  Its  daring  comments  and 
cock-sure  judgments  could  only  have  emanated 
from  undergraduate  circles. 

The  Governor  of  Massachusetts  was  the  au 
thor  of  the  following  comment  in  the  "Anvil" 
upon  the  achievements  of  the  Legislature  of  New 
Hampshire :  — 

The  State  Legislature,  after  an  unusually  short  ses 
sion,  has  at  length  adjourned.  Scarcely  anything  beyond 
the  necessary  work  of  a  session  has  been  attempted. 
To  be  sure,  a  zealous  reformer  offered  a  bill  which 
recognized  and  to  some  extent  atoned  for  the  wrongs 
of  the  weaker  sex,  but  our  sturdy  Spartan  legislators 
refused  to  grant  attention  to  a  subject  of  such  trivial 
importance,  and  voted  it  a  place  upon  the  table.  A 
movement  was  made  to  appropriate  $25,000  for  the 
purpose  of  making  a  much-needed  improvement  upon 
the  insane  asylum,  but  the  State  was  poor  —  so  thought 
these  rustic  statesmen — and  insanity  was  a  human  weak 
ness,  and  the  fostering  of  human  weaknesses  was  n't 
good  and  great,  and  so  it  was  wisely  ordained  that  the 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

State  should  discourage  people  in  their  foolish  habit  of 
becoming  insane  by  refusing  to  make  the  appropria 
tion.  The  "local-option"  plan,  which  is  finding  such 
favor  in  other  States,  and  which  was  recommended  for 
action  by  the  Governor,  was  not  meddled  with,  and  we 
think  wisely  too.  The  revision  of  the  Constitution, 
which  in  our  opinion  should  have  been  the  great  ques 
tion  of  the  Legislature,  was  left  untouched.  In  fact, 
about  the  only  positive  thing  these  eighteen  scores  of 
men  did,  in  a  session  of  twenty-eight  days,  was  to  ad 
journ.  This  Legislature  might  easily  have  rendered 
itself  more  dangerous  by  tinkering  with  the  laws  of  the 
State  in  imitation  of  other  legislative  bodies,  but  for 
cool,  stoical  inactivity  we  have  never  seen  its  equal.  If 
some  ingenious  Yankee  could  invent  a  machine  to  say 
yea,  yea,  and  nay,  nay,  but  principally  nay,  and  teach 
some  deaf  mute  to  run  it,  the  State  would  be  saved  the 
expense  of  assembling  its  sages  in  every  torrid  June. 

In  another  issue  of  the  "Anvil"  Mr.  McCall 
wrote  an  extended  report  of  the  inauguration  of 
the  Governor  of  New  Hampshire,  the  style  of 
which  may  be  inferred  from  this  sentence:  "The 
Governor  arose  and  in  a  firm  tone  announced 
that  he  had  a  sore  throat  and  that  the  clerk 
would  read  his  message." 

It  is  not  surprising  that  such  a  paper  made 
considerable  impression  upon  its  contemporaries 
and  was  much  quoted  in  the  metropolitan  jour 
nals.  It  was  never  a  financial  success,  however, 

15 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

and  as  it  was  a  private  venture,  published  at  the 
expense  of  the  editors,  some  of  them  had  cause 
to  regret  their  connection  with  it.  It  finally  came 
to  grief  because  of  an  audacious  article  reflecting 
upon  the  credit  of  the  Dartmouth  National  Bank, 
a  local  institution  of  which  the  college  treasurer 
was  cashier  and  which  was  regarded  as  a  fair 
subject  of  criticism.  As  a  result  the  faculty  inter 
vened,  and  after  two  or  three  more  numbers  pub 
lication  was  suspended.  Each  of  the  editors  gave 
a  note  for  his  share  of  the  debt  of  the  paper. 
After  a  number  of  years  Mr.  McCall  paid  his 
note,  and  in  speaking  of  it  at  a  college  dinner  he 
remarked  that  the  New  Hampshire  method  of 
computing  interest  made  compound  interest  seem 
quite  unimportant,  and  that  the  principal  of  his 
note  was  insignificant  as  compared  with  the  ac 
crued  interest. 

Like  many  other  distinguished  men,  Mr. 
McCall  has  had  some  experience  as  a  teacher. 
In  his  junior  year  at  Dartmouth,  the  principal 
of  Kimball-Union  Academy  at  Meriden,  New 
Hampshire,  fell  ill,  and  asked  the  president  of 
Dartmouth  to  send  a  student  to  teach  his  classes 
in  the  ancient  languages.  Mr.  McCall  was  sent 
and  for  three  weeks  expounded  Greek  and  Latin. 
It  was  one  of  his  pupils  at  this  institution  who, 
after  Mr.  McCall's  speech  in  1893  in  favor  of  the 
16 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

repeal  of  the  Silver  Purchase  Act,  wrote  to  him 
from  Nebraska :  — 

Dear  Sir :  You  once  were  my  teacher  in  Latin  and 
Greek  at  the  Kimball-Union  Academy.   I  have  just  read 
your  speech  on  the  silver  bill.  You  are  a  damned  fool. 
Yours  truly. 

To  this  frank  expression  ot  opinion  the  follow 
ing  reply  was  made  :  — 

Dear  Sir:  I  may  have  been  your  teacher  in  Latin 
and  Greek,  but  I  am  glad  I  was  not  your  teacher  in 
piety  and  propriety. 

Yours  respectfully 

S.  W.   McCALL. 

After  his  graduation,  while  he  and  his  friend 
Powers  were  studying  law  at  Nashua,  they  decided 
to  supplement  the  remittances  which  they  re 
ceived  from  home  by  teaching  a  night  school. 
Mr.  McCall  has  given  this  account  of  their 
experience :  — 

Many  of  the  pupils  were  lusty  chaps  and  pugilistic 
in  disposition.  Consequently,  when  Sam  taught  I 
watched,  and  when  I  taught  he  watched.  One  night 
he  got  into  a  heated  controversy  with  a  big  fellow  in 
the  back  line  of  seats,  and  there  were  indications  that 
the  fight  which  ensued  might  become  general.  I  knew 
the  school  could  whip  both  Sam  and  me,  and  so  I  said, 
"  Boys,  if  you  don't  interfere,  I  won't.  Let  the  better 
man  win."  Sam  conquered  the  ruffian  by  a  free  appli- 

17 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

cation  of  his  fists  and  has  ever  since  boasted  of  my  art 
in  diplomacy. 

While  a  boy  in  Illinois  Mr.  McCall  had  been 
captivated  by  a  speech  which  he  heard  Senator 
Lyman  Trumbull  make  at  a  county  fair,  and  while 
still  at  Dartmouth  he  arranged  that  on  his  grad 
uation  he  should  go  to  Chicago  and  study  law 
in  Trumbull's  office.  This  plan  was  abandoned, 
partly  perhaps  because  of  his  unwillingness  to  go 
so  far  away  from  the  young  lady  who  was  to  be 
come  his  wife,  and  partly  because  of  the  persua 
sion  of  his  classmate,  Samuel  L.  Powers,  who  was 
to  study  law  at  Nashua,  New  Hampshire,  and 
wished  Mr.  McCall  to  join  him.  After  a  year  at 
Nashua  the  two  young  men  removed  to  Worces 
ter,  Massachusetts,  where  they  continued  their 
studies,  and  in  1875  tne7  were  admitted  to  the 
Massachusetts  Bar.  They  formed  a  partnership 
and  opened  an  office  in  the  Equitable  Building  in 
Boston.  Like  many  another  young  law  firm,  it 
encountered  stormy  waters.  Their  first  case  con 
cerned  a  bill  often  dollars  for  rent,  and  they  lost 
it.  The  later  history  of  the  partnership  and  its 
final  dissolution  are  best  told  in  Mr.  McCall's 
own  words:  — 

Sam  said  we  ought  to  live  in  a  better-looking  house. 
It  would  help  business,  he  thought.   He  hunted  around 
and  found  an  imposing  edifice  with  a  marble  front.  We 
18 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

moved,  but  Sam  was  wrong.  Furthermore,  our  landlady 
kept  a  miserable  little  dog  which  furiously  barked  at  us 
every  time  we  approached  our  habitation.  Sam  said  that 
the  barking  was  undignified  and  that  it  tended  to  lower 
our  tone  both  as  lawyers  and  citizens.  "  Who,"  he 
asked,  "  wants  to  be  yelped  at  as  if  he  were  a  cow  or 
a  tramp  ? " 

On  Saturday  night,  if  our  resources  were  scant,  we 
went  home  together,  and  after  bedtime,  in  the  hope  of 
finding  the  dog  nodding  at  his  post,  dead,  or  absent.  But 
he  was  always  wide  awake  and  on  duty,  and  then  the 
woman  would  get  out  of  bed  and  dun  us.  Finally,  the 
firm  held  a  consultation.  Sam  said  that  the  partners 
separately  could  make  fully  as  much  money  as  they  could 
jointly.  He  got  a  piece  of  paper  and  multiplied  nothing 
by  one  and  then  by  two  and  mathematically  proved  the 
accuracy  of  his  observation.  Thus  the  partnership  was 
dissolved.  My  practice  grew  and  so  did  his  and  we  got 
along  all  right. 

Mr.  McCall's  law  practice,  in  which  he  had 
encountered  such  difficulties  in  the  beginning, 
finally  attained  considerable  proportions,  but  after 
he  entered  Congress,  where  he  remained  so  long, 
it  inevitably  disappeared. 

Throughout  these  early  years  at  the  bar  Mr. 
McCall  participated  in  the  discussion  of  public 
affairs  both  in  political  speeches  and  in  newspapers 
and  magazines.  He  began  a  life  of  Napoleon, 
part  of  which  was  published  in  a  magazine  which 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

failed  before  the  work  was  completed.  Another 
paper,  entitled  "  English  Views  of  America,"  re 
sented  the  condescending  attitude  assumed  to 
ward  America  by  English  visitors.  A  character 
who  strongly  attracted  him  and  was  made  the  sub 
ject  of  one  of  his  early  magazine  articles  was  Rufus 
Choate.  Another  article  was  a  somewhat  severe 
arraignment  of  Charles  Sumner.  In  consequence 
of  his  own  experience  subsequently  in  public  life, 
Mr.  McCall  has  said  that  he  has  modified  his 
judgment  and  would  not  now  be  so  harsh  with 
Sumner.  In  view  of  the  present  discussion  of 
national  preparedness,  an  article  by  him,  entitled 
"A  Plea  for  a  Strong  Navy,"  published  in  the 
"Perm  Monthly,"  Philadelphia,  in  1881,  is  of 
particular  interest.  Even  at  that  early  day,  when 
the  subject  was  not  much  discussed,  he  perceived 
the  necessity  of  maintaining  a  force  sufficient  to 
protect  the  rights  of  this  country.  In  a  striking 
passage  he  said:  — 

While  our  two  great  political  parties  are  fighting  over 
again  in  Congress  or  in  their  campaigns  the  battles  of 
the  rebellion,  while  they  are  disputing  whether  our  in 
significant  army  should  not  be  made  more  insignificant, 
the  weakness  of  our  navy  is  inviting  insult  to  our  flag 
upon  the  seas.  It  is  possible  for  European  ironclads  of 
even  the  second  rate  to  enter  our  harbors  uninjured  in 
spite  of  our  ships  of  war  or  of  any  guns  mounted  in  our 
20 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

forts,  to  hold  our  chief  cities  at  the  mercies  of  their 
armaments,  and  to  extort  from  our  merchants  tribute 
enough  to  build  three  navies.  We  are  not  even  secure 
from  invasion  by  foreign  troops.  The  fleets  of  England 
alone  could  escort  across  the  Atlantic  all  the  armies  of 
Europe,  and  the  battlefield  between  ourselves  and  foreign 
invaders,  which  should  be  the  wide  barrier  of  the  sea, 
would  thus  become  our  own  shores.  Suppose  some  for 
eign  power  should  attempt  an  invasion  with  a  well- 
trained  army  of  two  hundred  thousand  men  under  the 
convoy  of  a  powerful  fleet.  If  we  had  an  effective  navy, 
such  an  expedition  could  never  cross  the  ocean.  But 
with  our  present  fleet,  our  only  defense  would  be  the 
liability  to  a  disastrous  storm,  and  if  no  such  accident 
should  intervene,  the  expedition  could  without  doubt 
choose  its  own  landing-place.  And  what  would  prob 
ably  be  the  result?  It  is  by  no  means  sufficient  to  tell 
us  that  we  are  brave.  Experience  demonstrates  that  a 
regular  army,  manoeuvring  upon  open  plains,  such  as 
the  richest  portions  of  our  coast  afford,  should  be  en 
countered  with  discipline  as  well  as  valor.  Nothing  could 
be  hoped  for  from  our  weak  and  scattered  army,  but  we 
should  be  compelled  to  rely  upon  volunteers.  And  volun 
teers,  however  brave,  could  not  at  first  do  otherwise 
than  to  permit  such  an  army  to  slaughter  them.  In  a 
short  time  we  would  be  disciplined,  and,  by  incredible 
exertions,  our  unwieldly  masses  would  be  formed  into 
armies.  But  in  that  short  time  our  rich  and  unprotected 
cities,  the  wealthy  tract  of  country  along  our  eastern  sea 
board,  would  be  overrun  and  pillaged,  and  having  de 
stroyed  or  stolen  the  fruits  of  our  unexampled  growth, 

21 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

the  invaders  could  retreat  to  their  ships  as  the  English 
did  from  Portugal,  and  return  unharmed.  These  are  no 
mere  chimerical  dangers.  If  it  is  granted  that  they  are 
not  probable,  they  are  at  least  possible.  Wars  do  arise, 
and  in  these  days  of  ocean  cables  and  steamships  they 
can  arise  quickly.  Our  defenseless  condition  and  the 
possibility  of  inflicting  a  tremendous  blow  upon  us  might 
tempt  the  cupidity  or  ambition  of  foreign  nations.  It  is 
criminal  for  us,  through  our  weakness  and  our  wealth, 
to  permit  such  large  appeals  to  the  piratical  instincts  of 
mankind.  We  may  presume  too  far  upon  the  enlighten 
ment  even  of  this  age.  It  seems  little  less  tHan  treason 
able  negligence  upon  the  part  of  our  statesmen  to  permit 
such  humiliating  possibilities. 

In  1887  Mr.  McCall  was  elected  to  the  Mass 
achusetts  House  of  Representatives  from  the 
Winchester-Arlington  District,  and  with  but 
two  brief  intervals  he  has  been  in  the  service  of 
Commonwealth  or  Nation  ever  since.  In  this 
Legislature  he  was  made  chairman  of  the  House 
Committee  on  Probate  and  Insolvency,  and  he 
showed  his  reforming  tendencies  by  introducing 
a  bill  dealing  with  poor  debtors.  Prior  to  that 
time,  when  an  execution  had  been  obtained  for 
a  debt  of  more  than  twenty  dollars,  the  lawyer 
representing  the  creditors  would  have  the  debtor 
brought  before  an  inferior  magistrate,  who  was 
paid  by  fees.  As  the  business  of  some  of  the 
professional  debt-collectors  was  very  consider- 

22 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

able,  it  was  made  directly  to  the  interest  of  the 
magistrate  to  secure  the  business  of  these  law 
yers;  and  very  many  times  men  whose  only  crime 
was  poverty  were  sent  to  jail  for  debt,  while 
many  a  rich  debtor  was  able  to  defy  his  creditors. 
Mr.  McCall  introduced  a  comprehensive  bill 
which  abolished  the  fee  system,  and  conferred 
jurisdiction  over  cases  of  poor  debtors  upon  a 
reputable  and  established  court.  The  effect  of 
this  bill,  which  was  declared  at  the  time  to  have 
been  the  most  beneficent  measure  of  the  whole 
session,  was  to  abolish  imprisonment  for  debt  in 
Massachusetts,  except  in  cases  of  fraud. 

In  1888,  Mr.  McCall  made  his  first  appear 
ance  in  national  politics  in  consequence  of  elec 
tion  as  a  delegate  to  the  National  Republican 
Convention,  where  he  made  a  speech  before  the 
convention,  seconding  the  nomination  of  Judge 
Gresham. 

Early  in  that  year,  in  company  with  William 
E.  Barrett  and  Henry  Parkman,  he  purchased 
the  "Boston  Daily  Advertiser"  and  "Record" 
and  became  the  editor-in-chief  of  the  "Adver 
tiser."  During  his  editorship,  the  paper  was 
strongly  Republican,  and  supported  the  election 
of  Benjamin  Harrison. 

He  was  again  elected  to  the  Legislature  of 
1889,  and  was  made  chairman  of  the  Committee 

23 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

on  the  Judiciary,  a  position  which  made  him  the 
leader  of  the  House.  The  volume  of  work  before 
this  committee  was  unusually  large;  and  it  re 
ported  to  the  House  about  two  hundred  different 
measures.  It  is  extraordinary  that  in  only  one 
case  did  the  House  set  aside  the  recommendation 
of  the  committee. 

At  this  session,  Mr.  McCall  introduced  a 
corrupt  practices  bill.  It  was  adversely  reported 
by  the  Committee  on  Elections,  but  he  moved 
to  substitute  his  bill  in  the  House,  and  after  a 
contest,  it  passed  the  House,  although  it  failed 
in  the  Senate.  This  bill,  which  was  popularly 
known  at  the  time  as  "The  Anti-Boodle  Bill," 
was  the  first  corrupt  practices  bill  ever  passed 
by  a  legislative  body  in  America. 

At  this  session,  also,  Mr.  McCall  introduced 
an  order  for  the  abolition  of  the  Boston  City 
Council.  Although  the  order  was  not  adopted, 
it  was  not  without  effect;  for  thereafter  the 
Council  showed  a  commendable  degree  of  atten 
tion  to  business. 

One  of  the  most  important  events  of  the  ses 
sion  was  the  controversy  between  the  House  and 
the  Justices  of  the  Supreme  Judicial  Court.  Act 
ing  under  what  it  claimed  were  its  constitu 
tional  rights,  the  House  asked  the  opinion  of 
the  Justices  upon  certain  questions  growing  out 
24 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

of  the  laws  relating  to  the  public  schools.  The 
Justices  replied,  declining  to  give  their  opinion. 
This  reply  was  referred  to  the  Judiciary  Com 
mittee,  on  behalf  of  which  Mr.  McCall  prepared 
an  elaborate  and  learned  report,  and  introduced 
a  resolution  embodying  the  views  of  the  House, 
to  the  effect  that  it  was  the  constitutional  duty 
of  the  Justices  to  answer  the  questions  pro 
pounded  to  them.  This  resolution  was  adopted 
by  the  House  by  a  vote  of  168  to  8.  The  ques 
tion  involved  in  the  controversy  is  one  of  much 
importance  in  the  government  of  Massachusetts, 
and  was  widely  discussed  in  the  legal  periodicals 
of  that  time. 

Another  controversy  in  which  Mr.  McCall 
took  a  leading  part  arose  on  the  last  day  of  the 
session.  The  House  was  to  adjourn  on  June  7, 
and  on  that  day  a  bill  which  had  passed  the  Sen 
ate,  by  which  fishermen  were  excluded  from  the 
exemption  which  protects  the  wages  of  sailors 
from  trustee  process,  came  before  the  House 
for  action.  Mr.  McCall's  committee  to  which 
it  had  been  referred  reported  adversely;  but 
the  House,  by  a  majority  of  30,  set  aside  the 
report  of  the  Committee,  and  substituted  the 
bill. 

Mr.  McCall  vehemently  opposed  this  action, 
and  said:  — 

25 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

Throughout  all  the  last  campaign,  we  heard  of  little 
except  your  love  for  the  poor  fisherman.  You  deco 
rated  him  with  the  flag.  You  were  ready  to  die  in  de 
fense  of  the  men  who  compose  the  nursery  of  our  future 
navy,  who  brave  the  dangers  of  the  storm  and  the  Ca 
nadian  pirates,  and  were  finally  almost  the  only  men 
who  displayed  our  flag  upon  the  sea.  But  the  election 
has  been  held,  and  you  now  propose  to  repeal  the  only 
law  that  exists  in  his  favor.  He  was  emphatically  a 
sailor  for  campaign  purposes,  but  you  now  propose  to 
declare  that  he  is  not  a  sailor  for  purposes  of  the  trustee 
process.  While  I  am  as  anxious  to  adjourn  as  any  mem 
ber  of  this  House,  I  will  stay  here,  if  necessary,  until 
the  4th  of  July,  rather  than  permit  such  a  bill  to  pass, 
except  through  the  regular  stages. 

When  the  final  vote  was  taken,  the  House  re 
versed  itself,  chiefly  because  of  Mr.  McCall's  in 
dependent  opposition.  And  the  bill  was  finally 
defeated  by  27  votes. 

Mr.  McCall  was  not  a  member  of  the  Legis 
lature  the  following  two  years,  but  served  during 
that  period  as  a  Ballot  Law  Commissioner,  to 
which  office  he  was  appointed  by  Governor 
Russell.  In  1892  he  was  again  a  member  of  the 
Legislature,  and  became  chairman  of  the  House 
Committee  upon  Election  Laws.  This  position 
gave  him  opportunity  to  renew  the  agitation  which 
he  had  begun  two  years  before,  in  favor  of  the  en 
actment  of  a  corrupt  practices  act.  His  efforts 
26 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

were  now  successful,  and  the  bill  which  it  was  his 
good  fortune  to  conduct  through  the  House  be 
came  the  law  of  the  Commonwealth.  To  antici 
pate  somewhat  the  course  of  events,  it  may  be 
said  here  that  many  years  later,  while  a  member 
of  Congress,  he  introduced  a  bill  in  the  House 
dealing  with  the  same  subject.  After  two  or  three 
attempts,  it  finally  was  adopted,  and  bore  his 
name.  He  thus  has  had  the  distinction  of  leading 
the  way,  both  in  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts 
and  in  the  Federal  Congress,  in  the  enactment 
of  legislation  having  for  its  object  the  restric 
tion  and  regulation  of  the  use  of  money  in  elec 
tions. 

In  1891,  the  congressional  districts  in  Massa 
chusetts  were  rearranged,  and  Winchester,  the 
town  in  which  Mr.  McCall  resided,  was  taken 
out  of  the  Lynn  district,  in  which  it  had  been 
for  many  years,  and  where  Mr.  McCall  had  many 
friends,  and  was  attached  to  a  metropolitan  dis 
trict,  which  included  the  cities  of  Cambridge  and 
Somerville  and  the  Back  Bay  wards  of  Boston. 
Although  Winchester  was  the  smallest  place  in 
the  district,  Mr.  McCall  was  nominated  in  1892 
by  the  Republican  Party  as  its  candidate  for 
Representative  in  Congress.  His  opponent  was 
John  F.  Andrew,  a  son  of  the  great  "  War  Gov 
ernor,"  and  a  man  of  great  popularity.  The  con- 

27 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

test  was  a  notable  one;  and,  on  account  of  the 
balancing  of  the  political  parties  in  the  district, 
was  very  close;  but  although  William  E.  Russell, 
a  Democrat,  carried  the  district  for  Governor  by 
52  votes,  Mr.  McCall  was  elected  to  Congress 
by  992  votes.  This  was  the  first  of  his  ten  cam 
paigns  for  Congress.  And  it  is  a  notable  indica 
tion  of  his  popularity  among  his  constituents,  that 
each  time  after  his  first  nomination,  he  was  re- 
nominated  by  his  party  by  acclamation,  and  was 
reflected  by  substantial  majorities.  In  one  elec 
tion  his  majority  reached  the  figures  of  18,888, 
which  was  the  largest  majority  ever  given  to  a 
candidate  for  Congress  in  Massachusetts. 

Mr.  McCall's  part  in  the  discussion  of  the 
measures  which  came  before  Congress  during  his 
membership  of  twenty  years  in  the  House  will 
be  treated  in  subsequent  chapters.  It  should  be 
said  at  this  point,  however,  that  his  course  in 
Congress  was  marked  by  an  unusual  degree  of 
independence.  When  he  thought  that  the  atti 
tude  of  his  party  was  wrong,  he  did  not  hesitate 
to  say  so  and  to  vote  accordingly.  It  was  natural 
that  his  refusal  to  join  with  the  great  mass  of  his 
party  associates  in  Congress  in  support  of  the 
measures  advocated  by  the  President  should 
have  aroused  antagonism  in  the  minds  of  strong 
partisans,  to  whom  opposition  to  the  President 
28 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

appeared  little  short  of  treason.  At  a  Republi 
can  caucus  in  Winchester  in  September,  1900, 
a  resolution  was  presented  expressing  "  unquali 
fied  disapproval "  of  his  action  on  the  issues 
growing  out  of  the  Spanish  War,  and  declar 
ing  it  to  be  his  duty  to  fall  in  line  with  the  rest 
of  the  party,  especially  when  importuned  to  do 
so  by  such  a  man  as  Representative  Grosvenor 
of  Ohio.  An  interesting  discussion  followed, 
in  which  Mr.  McCall  participated.  He  gave  his 
reasons  for  his  attitude  on  the  various  matters  as 
to  which  he  had  been  criticized,  and  concluded 
by  saying,  "  If  you  are  looking  for  a  man  to  rep 
resent  you  who  will  vote  as  Grosvenor  says,  if 
you  want  a  man  with  the  backbone  of  an  angle 
worm,  don't  send  me  back  to  Congress."  The 
resolution  was  defeated  by  a  vote  of  197  to  3. 
The  next  month  Mr.  McCall  was  renominated 
by  acclamation  and  his  plurality  in  November 
was  nearly  12,000,  —  the  largest  given  to  any 
Massachusetts  Congressman  at  that  election. 

Few  candidates  for  public  office  have  ever  re 
ceived  so  marked  a  compliment  at  the  hands  of 
their  constituents  as  did  Mr.  McCall  in  the  elec 
tion  of  1904.  Mr.  Roosevelt,  then  at  the  zenith 
of  his  popularity,  was  the  candidate  for  Presi 
dent.  Mr.  Bates  was  the  Republican  nominee  for 
Governor  of  Massachusetts.  Mr.  McCall  was  for 

29 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

the  seventh  time  the  candidate  of  his  party 
for  Congress.  His  election  was  assured,  for  the 
Democrats  nominated  no  one  against  him.  This 
was  not  an  unprecedented  situation,  since  it 
rather  frequently  happens  that  a  party  which 
feels  itself  hopelessly  in  the  minority  does  not 
even  name  a  stalking  horse.  The  extraordinary 
feature  of  this  election  lay  not  in  the  fact  that 
the  opposition  named  no  candidate,  but  that 
about  forty  per  cent  of  the  Democratic  voters  in 
the  district  cast  their  ballots  for  Mr.  McCall.  The 
total  vote  of  the  three  Republican  candidates  in 
the  district  was  15,000  for  Bates  for  Governor, 
18,626  for  Roosevelt  for  President,  and  21,551 
for  McCall  for  Congress.  In  commenting  upon 
this  extraordinary  result,  a  metropolitan  journal 
said :  — 

The  wayfaring  man,  though  a  fool,  cannot  be  blind 
to  the  significance  of  all  this.  In  the  Eighth  District 
the  voters  encountered  the  appeal  of  two  very  different 
kinds  of  popularity.  Not  a  vestige  of  doubt  remains  re 
garding  President  Roosevelt's  popularity  ;  and  yet  in  the 
district  in  question  it  did  not  excite  so  much  enthusi 
asm  at  the  polls  as  that  evoked  by  Mr.  McCall.  The 
latter  has  none  of  the  spectacular  qualities  of  President 
Roosevelt.  The  President  "  does  things";  the  times 
have  apparently  been  right  for  his  kind  of  things  rather 
than  for  Mr.  McCall's.  .  .  .  Loyalty  to  the  Constitu 
tion,  a  rational  tariff,  justice  to  our  conquered  provinces, 

30 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

a  conservative  foreign  policy,  and  economy  in  public 
expenditures  are  issues  to  which  Mr.  McCall's  name 
has  been  indissolubly  linked  in  the  past.  His  record  is 
known  far  and  wide.  His  course  has  been  one  of  more 
than  mere  acquiescence  in  the  great  policies  just  enumer 
ated.  In  his  speeches  in  and  out  of  Congress,  and  by 
his  pen,  he  has  defended  them  with  skill  and  courage. 
His  remarkable  plurality  on  November  8  may  therefore 
be  regarded  as  Massachusetts'  clearest  utterance  regard 
ing  the  future  policy  of  the  nation. 

Mr.  McCall's  first  important  committee  ser 
vice  in  Congress  was  as  a  member  of  the  Com 
mittee  on  Elections,  of  which  he  was  chairman 
for  two  years.  In  fourteen  contests,  his  reports, 
several  of  which  were  against  his  own  party's 
candidates,  were  followed  by  the  House  in 
every  instance.  One  of  the  most  notable  of  these 
contests  was  that  between  Yost  and  Tucker, 
which  was  debated  by  the  House  for  two  days 
and  resulted  in  a  decision  in  favor  of  Tucker, 
the  Democratic  contestant,  by  a  majority  of  five 
votes.  The  system,  however,  by  which  the 
House  is  made  the  judge  of  what  is  essentially 
a  question  of  law  and  evidence,  is  bad,  and  Mr. 
McCall  introduced  a  resolution  providing  that 
in  every  such  case  there  should  be  a  preliminary 
investigation  by  a  court  whose  conclusions  could 
be  adopted  or  rejected  by  the  House  as  it  saw 

31 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

fit.  This  proposal,  however,  was  not  accepted, 
and  the  old  system  continues. 

Mr.  McCall  was  also  a  member  of  the  Judi 
ciary  Committee,  and  was  for  ten  years  a  mem 
ber  of  the  Committee  on  the  Library  during  four 
years  of  which  he  was  its  chairman.  This  com 
mittee  has  jurisdiction  over  bills  relating  to  public 
memorials  and  works  of  art  in  Washington.  For 
the  better  regulation  of  the  artistic  development 
of  our  capital  city  Mr.  McCall  introduced  a 
measure,  which  was  adopted,  for  the  establish 
ment  of  a  National  Commission  on  the  Fine 
Arts.  Some  of  the  most  eminent  of  American 
artists,  including  Burnham  the  architect,  French 
the  sculptor,  and  Olmsted  the  landscape  archi 
tect,  have  served  on  this  commission.  Such  legis 
lation  is  not  spectacular  and  attracts  the  attention 
of  comparatively  few,  but  the  development  of 
Washington,  which  is  rapidly  becoming  the 
world's  most  beautiful  capital,  owes  much  to 
this  measure.  Mr.  McCall  was  also  responsible 
for  the  completion  of  the  pediment  of  the  House 
wing  of  the  Capitol,  and  the  sculptured  group  by 
Paul  Bartlett,  which  is  now  about  to  be  put  in 
place,  will  confer  new  distinction  upon  Amer 
ican  art.  Another  important  work  with  which 
Mr.  McCall  is  associated  is  the  building  of  the 
Lincoln  Memorial,  the  design  of  which  shows 

32 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

that  it  will  be  one  of  the  most  beautiful  and 
impressive  structures  in  any  country.  He  was 
named  by  Congress  as  one  of  the  commission 
to  have  charge  of  its  erection.  His  most  import 
ant  committee  service,  however,  was  on  the  Com 
mittee  on  Ways  and  Means,  of  which  he  was  a 
member  for  fourteen  years  —  a  longer  tenure 
than  that  ever  enjoyed  by  any  other  New  Eng 
land  Representative.  The  nature  and  extent  of 
his  work  on  this  committee  will  appear  in  a  later 
chapter  dealing  with  the  tariff. 

Mr.  McCall  has  also  had  the  uncommon 
distinction  of  having  served  upon  nearly  every 
committee  appointed  by  the  House  for  the  inves 
tigation  of  the  conduct  of  its  own  members.  One 
of  these  was  the  committee  to  investigate  the 
charges  of  corruption  in  connection  with  the  pur 
chase  of  the  Danish  West  Indies.  The  most  im 
portant  committee  of  this  kind  was  that  appointed 
to  investigate  the  relations  of  members  of  the 
House  with  the  Post-Office  Department.  Charges 
and  insinuations  of  the  most  serious  character 
had  been  made  against  many  Representatives. 
Such  charges  could  not  be  ignored,  and  yet  if  the 
House  undertook  an  investigation  it  was  likely 
to  be  accused  of  "  whitewashing  its  members." 
The  character  of  the  men  appointed  to  this  com 
mittee  inspired  such  confidence  that  there  was 

33 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

general  acquiescence  in  its  findings.  It  was  com 
posed,  besides  Mr.  McCall,  of  Hitt  of  Illinois, 
Burton  of  Ohio,  Metcalf  of  California,  and  three 
Democrats  all  of  whom  had  served  upon  the 
bench.  Of  this  committee  Mr.  McCall  was  made 
the  chairman,  and  he  has  been  heard  to  refer  to 
this  appointment  as  the  highest  honor  which  he 
ever  received  at  the  hands  of  his  colleagues  in 
the  House. 

A  phase  of  Mr.  McCall's  career  in  Congress 
which  is  of  considerable  personal  interest  and  of 
some  public  importance  concerns  his  relations 
with  Speaker  Cannon.  When  Mr.  McCall  en 
tered  the  House  in  1893,  Mr.  Cannon  had 
already  been  a  member  since  1873.  Mr.  McCall 
had  high  respect  for  Mr.  Cannon's  ability  as  a 
legislator  and  especially  for  his  great  service  in 
connection  with  the  Committee  on  Appropria 
tions.  He  was  one  of  the  strongest  forces  ever 
in  Congress  in  favor  of  the  honest  and  economic 
expenditure  of  public  money.  No  proposition 
tainted  with  graft  ever  received  his  approval. 
Mr.  McCall  was  not  originally  in  favor  of  Mr. 
Cannon's  election  to  the  speakership,  but  he  was 
so  strong  that  all  other  candidates  withdrew  and 
in  the  Republican  caucus  he  had  no  opposition. 
As  Speaker  he  was  the  leading  representative  of 
his  party  in  the  House,  and  as  Mr.  McCall  fre- 

34 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

quently  criticized  the  party  he  often  antagonized 
the  Speaker.  The  relations  of  the  two  men  were 
thus  picturesquely  described  by  J.  B.  Morrow, 
a  prominent  Washington  correspondent :  — 

If  Samuel  Walker  McCall  were  an  ox,  tractable  un 
der  the  yoke  and  callous  to  the  gad,  he  might  be  the 
one  mighty  leader  in  the  labors  and  policies  of  the  lower 
House  of  Congress.  He  has  the  head  for  it.  But  he  is 
an  intellectual  thoroughbred,  with  the  pernicious  vices, 
from  a  party  point  of  view,  of  jumping  fences,  biting 
and  striking  at  his  trainers,  and  running  away  with 
those  who  try  to  drive  him.  So  he  is  put  in  a  stall 
by  himself,  and  whenever  Uncle  Joseph  Cannon  ap 
proaches,  either  with  a  bridle  or  a  measure  of  oats,  he 
carries  a  pitchfork  and  holloas  "  Whoa  ! " 

Mr.  Cannon  was  frequently  urged  to  displace 
Mr.  McCall  from  the  Committee  on  Ways  and 
Means  because  of  his  advocacy  of  lower  duties, 
but  the  Speaker  steadily  refused  and  reappointed 
him  in  each  Congress. 

At  the  end  of  Mr.  Cannon's  third  term  in  the 
speakership,  he  was  perhaps  the  most  popular 
man  in  his  party.  Then  he  incurred  the  hostility 
of  the  newspapers  because  of  his  opposition  to 
free  paper.  It  soon  became  the  correct  thing  to 
criticize  the  Speaker.  The  so-called  "insurgents" 
reaped  a  golden  harvest  of  reputation  by  abus 
ing  Mr.  Cannon.  To  attack  "  Uncle  Joe"  was 

35 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

at  that  time  a  short  cut  to  fame.  The  opprobrium 
heaped  upon  him  makes  one  wonder  why  an  in 
telligent  constituency  has  chosen  him  as  its  Rep 
resentative  for  forty  years  and  why  his  colleagues 
in  the  House  have  four  times  elected  him  to  the 
office  of  Speaker.  In  spite  of  the  honors  which 
his  party  had  showered  upon  him,  enough  Re 
publicans  were  found  who  were  willing  to  unite 
with  the  solid  Democratic  membership  in  a  move 
ment  to  degrade  him,  and  a  resolution  was 
brought  in  to  remove  him  from  the  Committee 
on  Rules,  of  which  the  Speaker  had  been  a  mem 
ber  ex  qfficiofor  fifty  years.  In  the  debate  on  the 
resolution,  March  19, 1910,  Mr.  McCallsaid:  — 

Mr.  Speaker,  I  desire  to  say  a  few  words  upon  the 
proposition  before  the  House;  but  it  is  manifestly  im 
possible  to  discuss  it  within  the  two  minutes  yielded  to 
me. 

This  proceeding,  in  my  opinion,  is  aimed  at  the 
Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives.  The  prop 
osition  of  the  gentleman  from  South  Dakota  deposes 
the  Speaker  from  his  present  position  as  a  member  of 
the  Committee  on  Rules.  Now,  if  it  were  an  entirely 
new  proposition,  at  the  beginning  of  a  Congress,  I 
should  consider  its  adoption ;  but  I  do  not  propose  to 
vote  for  it,  and  I  do  not  consider  that  it  is  open  to  be 
passed  by  a  House  controlled  by  Republicans.  I  do  not 
propose  to  vote  to  deliver  the  Speaker,  bound  hand  and 
foot,  over  to  the  minority  party$  although  I  know  that 

36 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

if  you  do  that,  he  will  go  with  head  unbowed  and  erect, 
in  the  simple  majesty  of  American  manhood.  [Ap 
plause.]  This  movement  does  not  originate  in  the 
House  of  Representatives.  I  am  not  undiscriminating. 
I  do  not  condemn  a  whole  class,  but  you  are  about  to 
do  the  behest  of  a  gang  of  literary  highwaymen  who  are 
entirely  willing  to  assassinate  a  reputation  in  order  to 
sell  a  magazine.  [Applause.]  I  believe  that  the  Speaker 
of  the  House,  by  his  conduct  in  the  last  three  days,  if 
the  country  has  been  permitted  to  know  it,  has  shat 
tered  many  of  the  criticisms  that  have  been  made  against 
him;  and,  as  I  see  him  there,  his  spirit  reminds  me  of 
that  of  the  old  Ulysses  starting  off  on  his  last  voyage:  — 

«'  Push  off,  and  sitting  well  in  order  smite 
The  sounding  furrows ;  for  my  purpose  holds 
To  sail  beyond  the  sunset,  and  the  baths 
Of  all  the  western  stars,  until  I  die." 

[Applause.] 

As  Mr.  McCall  approached  the  completion  of 
twenty  years  of  continuous  service  in  the  House 
of  Representatives,  he  decided  not  to  be  a  candi 
date  for  reelection.  This  decision  was  announced 
to  his  constituents  in  the  following  letter :  — 
To  the  Voters  of  the  Eighth  Congressional  District :  — 

I  have  decided  not  to  be  a  candidate  for  the  House  of 
Representatives  at  the  approaching  election.  I  have  an 
ambition,  not  unworthy,  I  trust,  to  serve  you  in  another 
capacity,  concerning  which  I  shall  make  a  definite  an 
nouncement  at  a  suitable  time.  But,  apart  from  that, 
after  the  strain  of  twenty  years'  continuous  service  in 

37 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

a  great  popular  assembly  like  the  national  House  of  Rep 
resentatives,  I  should  feel  quite  disposed  to  ask  you  not 
to  consider  me  in  selecting  your  Representative. 

I  regret  keenly  to  arrive  at  this  conclusion.  The 
Eighth  Massachusetts  District  is  altogether  unique.  In 
point  of  intelligence  and  civic  virtue  it  has  no  superior 
in  the  country.  The  support  I  have  received  from  such 
a  constituency  is  far  beyond  my  deserts.  Since  my  first 
election  in  1892  I  have  been  regularly  renominated  by 
acclamation  in  the  conventions  of  my  party,  and  have 
been  elected  by  the  most  gratifying  majorities.  I  have 
always  felt  that  the  best  recompense  I  could  make  for 
your  generous  support  was  to  reverence  my  relation  as 
your  Representative  and  treat  your  commission  broadly 
as  a  mandate  to  serve  the  whole  country. 

Those  twenty  years  have  been  crowded  with  events 
so  momentous  as  to  make  them,  with  the  exception 
of  the  Civil  War  era,  easily  the  most  important  period 
since  the  establishment  of  our  Government.  In  meeting 
the  difficult  problems  forced  upon  the  attention  of  Con 
gress,  I  have  often  felt  called  upon  to  act  independently 
of  my  own  party,  and  sometimes  of  both  parties.  While 
I  have  occasionally  found  myself  in  a  small  minority,  I 
have  known  no  other  way  than  to  follow  where  my  own 
judgment  clearly  led.  But  this  is  not  the  place,  nor  is 
mine  the  pen,  to  recount  the  record  of  those  years.  I 
may  only  say  that  the  chief  purpose  animating  me  in 
my  service  has  been  to  help  keep  vital  the  essential  prin 
ciples  of  the  American  Constitution  so  necessary  to  the 
continued  greatness  of  our  country  and  to  the  preserva 
tion  of  our  liberties. 

38 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

I  acknowledge  my  deep  gratitude  at  the  opportunity 
of  service  you  have  given  me.  In  that  service  I  have 
doubtless  made  many  mistakes,  but  my  intention  has 
always  been  true  to  you,  and  the  commission  I  return  is 
as  clean  as  on  the  day  when  I  received  it  from  your 
hands. 

SAMUEL  W.  McCALL. 

Myopia  Road,  Winchester,  Mas 3. 
July  ip,  1912. 

Senator  Crane  had  already  announced  his  in 
tention  to  retire  from  the  Senate  on  the  expira 
tion  of  his  term.  The  choice  of  his  successor 
aroused  interest  throughout  the  country.  The 
general  opinion  of  the  press  indicated  Mr.  McCall 
as  the  most  appropriate  selection.  In  fact  he  was 
the  only  candidate  who  attracted  the  attention  of 
the  great  newspapers  outside  of  the  State.  The 
"  New  York  Times"  in  a  long  editorial  said  :  — 

It  really  looks  as  if  Massachusetts  was  making  up  its 
mind  to  honor  itself  and  serve  the  nation  as  well  by 
sending  Samuel  W.  McCall  to  the  Senate  to  fill  the  va 
cancy  caused  by  the  retirement  of  Murray  Crane.  It  is 
a  Bay  State  tradition  that  the  senatorship  is  an  office  not 
to  be  wasted  upon  small  men.  Tradition  counts  for 
more  in  Massachusetts  than  in  some  other  States.  She 
has  had  a  habit  of  sending  to  the  Senate  men  of  note 
and  real  substance,  men  whose  reputations  become  coun 
trywide.  Congressman  McCall  is  worthy  of  a  place  in 
that  distinguished  line.  He  has  the  gifts  and  the  acquire- 

39 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

ments  that  fit  him  for  public  life,  for  the  senatorial  ca 
reer.  .  .  .  He  is  a  man  of  matured  opinions  and  strong 
convictions  with  the  full  courage  thereof.  No  man  is 
more  insensible  to  public  clamor  of  the  passionate, 
wrong-headed  kind,  yet  none  more  ready  to  support 
worthy  causes  with  his  voice  and  all  the  powers  of  his 
mind.  .  .  .  Progressives  will  be  inclined  to  call  him  a 
reactionary.  The  description  is  inappropriate.  Mr.  Mc- 
Call  does  believe  in  the  Constitution  and  in  the  inde 
pendence  of  the  judiciary.  He  has  faith  in  many  prin 
ciples  and  institutions  of  government  that  came  into 
being  longer  ago  than  last  summer.  But  he  understands 
the  sober-minded  people  of  the  United  States.  He  knows 
the  needs  of  the  country.  One  of  its  needs  is  more 
men  like  Samuel  W.  McCall  in  the  Senate. 

The  most  distinguished  citizen  of  the  district 
which  Mr.  McCall  represented  in  Congress  so 
long,  President  Eliot,  expressed  himself  in  favor 
of  Mr.  McCall's  election  in  a  letter  containing 
this  passage :  — 

On  constitutional  and  judicial  questions  Mr.  McCall 
is  conservative,  like  the  great  majority  of  the  people  of 
Massachusetts.  In  regard  to  the  industrial,  financial, 
and  social  reforms  in  which  Massachusetts  is  sincerely 
interested  and  has  long  been  a  leader,  Mr.  McCall's 
position  is  that  of  a  reasonable,  prudent,  open-minded 
man,  who  wishes  to  avoid  doing  harm  while  trying  to 
do  good.  In  general,  Mr.  McCall  is  an  independent 
thinker,  who  has  the  courage  of  his  convictions,  and  is 
willing  to  be  in  a  minority  for  the  time  being,  and  so 
40 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

makes  the  action  of  the  majority  wiser  and  more  likely 
to  be  durable.  It  is  of  high  importance  that  men  of  this 
sort  should  be  kept  in  Congress. 

Charles  Francis  Adams  also  printed  and  widely 
circulated  a  strong  appeal  for  the  election  of  Mr. 
McCall. 

The  "  Springfield  Republican,"  in  comment 
ing  upon  President  Eliot's  letter,  said  that  among 
all  the  aspirants  for  senatorial  honors  in  Massa 
chusetts  "  Congressman  McCall  is  conspicuously 
the  one  favored  by  prominent  citizens  who  are 
without  interest  in  the  matter  beyond  a  de 
sire  that  the  best  thing  for  the  State  may  be 
done." 

It  was  before  the  day  of  the  election  of  senators 
by  popular  vote.  Indeed  it  was  the  last  election  in 
Massachusetts  at  which  a  United  States  senator 
was  chosen  by  the  Legislature.  The  contest  in 
the  Republican  caucus  was  a  long  one  and  the 
balloting  ran  through  four  days.  Mr.  McCall 
was  the  leading  candidate  at  the  start,  and  at  the 
end  of  the  third  day  he  lacked  but  a  few  votes  of 
a  majority  of  the  caucus,  but  at  the  last  he  failed 
to  receive  the  nomination.  No  sooner  was  the 
contest  ended  than  suggestions  of  further  polit 
ical  honors  for  him  began  to  be  made.  Massa 
chusetts  felt  that  the  most  distinguished  man 
whom  she  had  sent  to  the  House  of  Representa- 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

tives  for  many  years  must  not  be  allowed  to 
withdraw  from  public  life.  From  all  parts  of  the 
State  came  demands  that  he  accept  the  nomina 
tion  for  Governor.  For  the  time,  however,  Mr. 
McCall  determined  to  remain  in  private  life. 
He  had  literary  engagements  which  would  fully 
occupy  him,  and  to  be  relieved  of  official  cares 
of  any  sort  would  give  him  a  freedom  such  as 
he  had  not  known  for  nearly  a  quarter  of  a  cen 
tury. 

On  the  last  day  of  Mr.  McCall's  service  in 
the  House,  his  colleagues  by  unanimous  consent 
yielded  him  the  floor,  and  he  pronounced  a  brief 
speech  of  farewell  which  in  its  gentle  humor  and 
lofty  idealism  was  typical  of  all  his  public  utter 
ances.  He  said :  — 

Mr.  Speaker,  if  I  were  to  indulge  in  anything  in  the 
nature  of  a  valedictory  and  impose  it  on  the  House,  I 
should  perhaps  follow  recent  precedents  rather  than  my 
own  inclination,  and  I  should  feel  that  what  I  might 
say  would  suggest  by  contrast  rather  than  by  resem 
blance  the  wit  of  my  genial  colleague  from  Massachu 
setts  and  the  grace  and  eloquence  of  my  fair-haired 
friend  from  Pennsylvania.  "  Positively  last  appearances  " 
are  under  suspicion.  A  farewell  address  which  is  en 
gagingly  spoken  is  apt  to  defeat  its  object,  because  it  is 
liable  to  incite  the  people  to  take  political  action  which 
may  make  it  necessary  to  repeat  the  performance. 
[Laughter.] 

42 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

I  am  not  thinking  of  making  that  kind  of  address, 
but  as  I  am  about  to  leave  the  House  to-day,  I  thought 
I  would  like  to  say  a  few  words  to  the  members  with 
whom  I  have  been  associated  so  long.  I  say  simply  this 
to  the  members  of  the  House  individually,  that  I  shall 
be  entirely  satisfied  if  their  respect  for  me  is  equal  to 
my  respect  for  them.  [Applause.] 

Of  the  House  as  a  whole,  I  would  say  I  reverence 
its  structure  and  its  place  in  our  Constitution  ;  but  it 
seems  to  me  it  might  occupy  a  more  powerful  practical 
place,  and  that  with  its  democratic  composition  and 
with  the  popular  character  of  our  Government  it  rests 
with  the  House  itself  to  say  whether  or  not  it  shall  be 
the  dominating  organ  in  our  system  of  Government. 

In  my  twenty  years  of  service  here  I  have  voted 
against  a  great  many  measures  that  finally  became  laws  : 
and  if  I  had  any  particular  regret  to-night  in  that  re 
spect,  it  would  be  that  I  had  not  voted  against  more  of 
them,  because  I  believe  there  is  much  truth  in  what 
Mr.  Burke  said,  that  repeal  is  more  blessed  than  enact 
ment.  We  are  acquiring  a  facility  for  passing  laws;  we 
are  making  such  encroachments  upon  our  own  freedom 
that  I  trust  those  of  you  who  remain  here  will  do  what 
you  can  to  postpone  the  day,  now  threatening  to  come 
speedily,  when  a  multiplicity  of  statutes  shall  mar  the 
fair  image  of  our  liberties.  If  we  are  to  sacrifice  our 
freedom  upon  the  altar  of  piled-up  statutes,  then  it 
will  only  be  left  for  us  to  strive  to  attain  some  such 
lofty  but  difficult  refuge  as  that  portrayed  in  the  lines 
of  a  noble  Greek  poet,  nobly  rendered  by  Gilbert 
Murray :  — 

43 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

"  But  the  world  with  a  great  wind  blows, 

Blowing  to  beautiful  things; 
On  amid  dark  and  light, 

Till  life,  through  the  trammelings 
Of  laws  that  are  not  the  right, 

Breaks  clear  and  pure,  and  sings 
Glorying  to  God  in  the  height." 

[Applause.] 

When  Mr.  McCall  retired  from  Congress  the 
Republican  Party  in  Massachusetts  was  in  a  bad 
way.  It  is  not  unusual  for  the  Democrats  to  elect 
their  candidate  for  Governor,  but  he  seldom  ob 
tains  a  reelection,  and  until  recently  there  has 
been  no  instance  of  two  Democratic  Governors 
in  succession.  But  beginning  in  1910,  the  Demo 
crats  carried  the  governorship  in  five  successive 
elections  and  with  two  different  candidates.  Part 
of  their  success  could  be  attributed  to  the  defec 
tion  of  the  Progressives  from  the  Republican 
Party,  but  there  were  also  other  causes.  As  the 
party  went  down  to  defeat  year  after  year,  it 
grew  disheartened  and  discouraged,  and  it  be 
came  evident  that  the  strongest  man  in  the  ranks 
must  be  drafted  into  service  if  the  party  was  to 
regain  control  of  the  State.  Mr.  McCall  was 
urged  to  accept  the  nomination.  In  1913  he  re 
fused,  but  the  next  year,  when  the  matter  was 
pressed  upon  him  again,  he  agreed  to  accept  pro 
vided  the  nomination  came  to  him  without  a 

44 


CHIEFLY  BIOGRAPHICAL 

contest.  In  so  doing  he  realized  that  he  was 
probably  entering  upon  a  losing  fight.  Indeed, 
he  was  urged  by  many  of  his  friends  to  announce 
that  he  was  a  candidate  for  the  nomination  for 
two  years.  This,  however,  would  have  amounted 
to  a  confession  of  defeat  at  the  beginning  of  the 
campaign  and  was  not  to  be  thought  of. 

The  contest  upon  which  Mr.  McCall  entered 
in  1914  was  a  difficult  one.  His  chief  opponent 
was  the  most  popular  Democrat  who  has  ap 
peared  in  Massachusetts  politics  since  the  days 
of  Governor  Russell.  The  breach  with  the  Pro 
gressives  had  not  yet  healed  and  this  deprived 
the  Republican  candidate  of  much  support  which 
he  would  otherwise  have  received.  But  Mr.  Mc 
Call  fought  the  campaign  with  vigor,  and  a  few 
days  before  the  election  he  predicted  that  he 
would  receive  200,000  votes.  The  returns  showed 
that  he  was  only  a  few  hundred  votes  in  error. 
While  he  was  defeated,  he  had  raised  the  Repub 
lican  vote  from  116,705  of  the  year  previous  to 
198,627,  and  had  attracted  so  many  Progressives 
back  to  the  fold  that  the  ultimate  merging  of 
that  party  with  the  Republicans  was  seen  to  be 
imminent.  This  notable  achievement  made  his 
renomination  in  1915  natural  and  just.  While 
he  was  not  accorded  this  honor  without  a  con 
test,  a  reunited  party  was  successful  at  the  polls, 

45 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

and  the  Republicans  elected  their  Governor. 
Mr.  McCall  received  235,843  votes,  which  was 
the  largest  vote  with  a  single  exception  ever  cast 
for  a  Governor  in  Massachusetts.  The  vote  of 
the  Progressive  Party  was  so  small  that  it  lost 
its  legal  status  as  a  party.  When  Mr.  McCall 
was  inaugurated  on  January  6,  1916,  the  Repub 
lican  Party  for  the  first  time  since  1909  found 
itself  in  complete  control  of  the  Executive  de 
partment  of  the  State  as  well  as  of  both  branches 
of  the  Legislature. 

The  accession  of  the  new  Governor  brought 
into  office  a  man  to  whose  training  several  sections 
of  the  country  had  contributed.  Born  in  Penn 
sylvania,  he  had  passed  his  boyhood  amidst  the 
prairies  of  northwestern  Illinois,  and  then,  con 
trary  to  the  general  current  which  carried  men 
westward,  he  had  cast  in  his  fortunes  with  Mas 
sachusetts,  where  his  long  career  in  the  public 
service  had  been  fittingly  recognized  by  his  elec 
tion  to  the  highest  office  in  the  Commonwealth. 


CHAPTER    II 

TWENTY   YEARS    OF    LEGISLATION 

MR.  McCALL  took  his  seat  in  Congress 
August  5,  1893,  at  the  special  session 
called  by  President  Cleveland  for  the  repeal  of 
the  Silver  Purchase  Act  of  1890.  This  law  had 
not  had  its  expected  effect  in  maintaining  the 
price  of  silver.  After  a  short  rise,  the  price  of  sil 
ver  bullion  had  steadily  fallen.  While  the  law 
was  in  effect  more  than  $  140,000,000  of  treasury 
notes  had  been  issued  for  the  purchase  of  silver, 
which  lay  uncoined  in  the  vaults.  Hundreds  of 
millions  of  greenbacks  were  in  circulation,  as  well 
as  hundreds  of  millions  of  silver  dollars,  which 
were  worth  inherently  only  a  fraction  of  their 
nominal  value.  For  the  maintenance  at  par  and 
the  redemption  of  all  this  money,  there  was  a 
gold  reserve  which,  for  the  first  time  since  1879, 
had  fallen  below  $100,000,000.  There  was  a  gen 
eral  distrust  of  the  Government's  ability  to  main 
tain  the  gold  standard,  and  a  financial  panic  en 
sued.  President  Cleveland  summoned  Congress 
and  recommended  as  a  measure  of  relief  that  the 
Silver  Purchase  Act  of  1890  be  repealed.  There 

47 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

was  much  doubt  as  to  whether  this  would  be  done. 
In  fact,  if  President  Cleveland  had  to  rely  on  the 
votes  of  his  own  party,  it  was  known  that  it  could 
not  be  accomplished.  A  majority  of  the  Demo 
crats  were  already  infected  with  those  heresies 
which  were  to  lead  the  party  to  its  downfall  in 
1896  and  make  it  a  negligible  quantity  for  a 
dozen  years.  But  the  situation  was  altogether  too 
serious  for  partisanship.  The  Republicans  gave 
the  President  the  support  which  was  denied  him 
by  his  own  party,  and  the  Silver  Purchase  Act 
was  repealed.  In  the  Republican  State  Conven 
tion  in  Massachusetts  in  1892,  Mr.  McCall,  as 
chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Resolutions,  had 
brought  in  a  resolution  in  favor  of  this  action.  He 
was  therefore  committed  to  this  course  when  he 
took  his  seat  in  Congress,  and  his  first  speech 
was  in  support  of  the  recommendation  of  Presi 
dent  Cleveland.  He  said:  — 

I  agree  entirely  with  the  proposition  advanced  in  this 
House  by  most  of  the  opponents  of  this  bill,  that  the 
question  at  issue  is  monometallism  against  bimetallism; 
but  I  do  not  agree  with  those  gentlemen  as  to  which 
side  represents  monometallism  and  which  side  represents 
bimetallism.  To  my  mind  it  is  as  clear  as  the  sunshine 
that  a  continuance  of  the  policy  of  the  Government  in 
purchasing  4,500,000  ounces  of  bullion  each  month, 
or  the  free  coinage  of  silver  at  any  of  the  ratios  in  the 


TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

amendments  pending  before  this  House,  will  result  in 
this  country's  becoming  a  monometallic  and  not  a  bi 
metallic  country,  and  in  our  having  as  our  standard  of 
value  the  amount  of  silver  coined  in  the  silver  dollar.  . . . 

During  the  three  years  in  which  we  have  been  upon 
this  policy  our  Treasury  has  parted  with  nearly  $100,- 
000,000  of  its  gold,  and  the  reason  it  has  not  parted 
with  precisely  the  amount  of  gold  that  it  has  purchased 
in  silver  is,  in  my  judgment,  due  to  the  extraordinary 
measures  pursued  by  it  during  the  last  two  years  to  keep 
it.  If  we  look  at  the  matter  from  an  international  stand 
point  we  find  this  remarkable  coincidence,  that  up  to 
July  1, 1893,  we  had  purchased  $140,500,000  of  silver 
bullion,  and  we  had  exported  from  this  country  $141,- 
000,000  of  gold.  The  effect  of  this  policy  then,  I  say, 
is  precisely  what  we  might  expect  it  would  be  —  that 
as  we  have  parted  with  our  gold  we  have  piled  up  silver. 

It  will  not  require  any  very  long  time,  it  will  not  be 
a  very  distant  day  when  this  Government,  at  this  rate, 
will  have  parted  with  so  much  of  its  gold  that  it  will  be 
compelled  to  suspend  gold  payments,  and  the  result  will 
thus  inevitably  be  the  expulsion  of  all  our  gold  from  cir 
culation,  and  the  placing  of  the  country  upon  a  silver 
standard. 

And  that  is  the  essential  question  at  issue  here  to 
day.  What  standard  do  we  propose  to  maintain  in  this 
country  ?  What  is  our  dollar  ?  You  might  infer  that  a 
"  dollar  "  was  simply  a  fiat  of  the  Government,  an  um 
bra,  a  piece  of  that  very  intangible  and  unmeasurable 
thing  called  the  "  faith  of  the  Government."  .  .  . 

But  there  is  this  significant  thing  in  the  situation, this 

49 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

extraordinary  coincidence,  that  what  we  call  our  dollar 
is  worth  precisely,  and  has  been  since  the  first  day  of 
January,  1879,  the  amount  of  gold  in  the  gold  dollar. 
That  means  simply  that  we  are  upon  a  gold  standard. 
That  means  that  the  gold  dollar  is,  in  effect,  the  dol 
lar  of  ultimate  redemption,  and  every  one  of  our  dollars, 
whatever  may  be  the  intrinsic  value  of  the  material  of 
which  it  is  made  or  upon  which  it  is  stamped,  whether 
it  is  worthless  paper  or  whether  it  is  silver,  is  worth  pre 
cisely  the  value  of  the  amount  of  gold  in  a  gold  dollar. 
That  results  from  the  fact  that  this  Government  has 
since  1879  declared  its  purpose  to  convert  every  kind 
of  its  dollars  into  any  other  kind  that  any  person  may 
desire.  The  consequence  has  been  that  so  long  as  it 
could  maintain  payment  upon  the  basis  of  the  gold  dol 
lar,  which  is  the  most  expensive  dollar,  that  would  be 
our  standard  of  value.  But  when  we  see  the  gold  flow 
ing  from  our  Treasury  we  see  that  the  Government  is 
appoaching  the  point  where,  although  it  may  have  the 
willingness,  it  cannot  have  the  ability  to  redeem  its 
promises,  and  when  the  time  arrives  then  it  will  have 
to  go  to  the  basis  of  the  next  most  valuable  dollar.  .  .  . 

He  then  points  out  that  during  the  past  twenty 
years,  many  governments  had  ceased  to  coin  sil 
ver  and  at  the  same  time  the  world  output  of 
that  metal  had  increased.  The  inevitable  result 
was  a  fall  in  price. 

I  do  not  imagine  that  it  is  necessary  here  to  repeat 
any  of  the  old  classical  arguments  about  the  desirability 

50 


TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

of  the  gold  standard  as  against  the  silver  standard ;  and 
I  may  say  here  that  I  take  no  stock  whatever  in  the 
exploded  theory  that  we  can  have  a  double  standard.  I 
do  not  believe  you  can  have  any  double  standard  of 
value  any  more  than  you  can  have  a  double  quart  meas 
ure  or  a  double  pound  weight.  It  seems  to  me  that  we 
must  adopt  some  standard  in  value j  and  while,  from 
the  nature  of  the  case,  we  cannot  get  anything  that  is 
inflexible,  that  will  never  rise  or  decrease  in  value,  it  is 
our  duty  to  adopt  that  at  least  which  will  put  us  on 
terms  of  equality  with  the  other  trading  nations  of  the 
world,  and  which  will  possess,  in  the  highest  degree 
obtainable,  the  quality  of  stability. 

If  we  take  the  value  of  gold  as  compared  with  labor, 
which  I  think  is  fairly  the  unit  of  production,  we  shall 
see  that  gold  and  labor  during  the  last  twenty  years 
have  maintained  their  relations  to  each  other,  and  that 
wages  expressed  in  terms  of  gold  are  at  least  equal 
to-day  to  what  they  were  twenty  years  ago,  if  not 
greater.  .  .  . 

There  is  another  reason  in  favor  of  the  gold  stand 
ard  besides  the  reason  that  it  is  the  better  standard. 
The  gold  standard  is  the  existing  standard  in  this  coun 
try,  and  it  should  require  some  very  potent  reason  to 
justify  us  in  changing  that  standard  to  another.  .  .  . 

So  long  as  this  Government  is  able,  and  so  long  as 
the  people  believe  it  able,  to  redeem  all  its  money  in 
gold,  people  will  be  entirely  controlled  in  the  kind  of 
money  they  select  by  considerations  of  mere  conven 
ience.  But  the  moment  the  point  is  reached  when 
it  appears  that  the  Government  may  not  be  able  to 

51 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

redeem  all  its  money  in  gold,  but  that  some  holders  of 
its  obligations  will  be  obliged  to  take  a  less  valuable 
metal,  then  convenience  gives  place  to  fear;  the  bill 
holder  becomes  timid ;  and  from  the  effect  of  this  im 
pulse  of  fear  there  is  a  locking  up  of  our  money  from 
actual  use. 

I  say,  in  conclusion,  that  if  we  want  to  maintain  the 
two  metals  in  circulation  here,  if  we  want  to  maintain 
the  gold  standard  in  this  country,  if  we  do  not  desire 
to  drive  from  our  business  every  drop  of  the  rich,  red, 
golden  blood  that  vitalizes  every  civilized  nation,  if  we 
do  not  wish  to  continue  this  paralysis  of  business,  and 
subject  our  farmers  to  the  system  of  exchange  that  is 
chiefly  responsible  for  the  degradation  and  practical 
slavery  of  the  Indian  peasant,  we  will  have  to  repeal 
the  act  of  1890  unconditionally.  And  while  we  may 
not  restore  confidence  in  the  minds  of  the  people  at  one 
blow,  we  will  go  very  far  towards  remedying  the  de 
pression  which  has  settled  upon  all  of  the  industries  of 
the  country.  [Applause.] 

There  are  few  members  of  Congress  whose 
first  speech  in  that  body  has  attracted  such  wide 
attention  as  did  this.  William  Everett,  a  keen 
critic,  who  was  a  member  of  the  House  at  the 
time,  said  in  the  discussion  that  Mr.  McCall  had 
proved  himself  thoroughly  worthy  to  speak  for 
the  district  in  which  Harvard  College  stood. 

Many  years  afterward  Mr.  McCall  said  of 
President  Cleveland's  conduct  on  this  occasion: 

5* 


TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

Mr.  Cleveland  displayed  a  resolute  courage  in  press 
ing  the  measure,  but  he  achieved  a  large  measure  of  un 
popularity  with  his  party,  which  was  in  favor  of  free 
coinage  as  was  afterward  clearly  shown.  That  his  ef 
forts  prevented  the  currency  of  the  country  from  falling 
speedily  to  the  silver  standard,  there  can  be  no  doubt. 
The  contest  was  not  finally  won.  Other  battles  remained 
to  be  fought.  But  it  would  have  been  lost  but  for  the 
Silver  Purchase  repeal.  And  those  who  believe  that  in 
calculable  damage  would  have  come  upon  the  country 
by  the  depreciation  of  its  currency,  and  its  departure 
from  the  established  standard  of  the  civilized  world,  will 
hold  in  grateful  remembrance  the  patriotic  self-sacrifice 
and  the  stern  and  heroic  courage  of  Grover  Cleveland. 

Three  years  after  the  repeal  of  the  Silver 
Purchase  Act  came  the  Bryan  campaign  on  a 
free-silver  platform.  Mr.  McCall  carried  the 
war  into  that  part  of  the  country  where  the  sen 
timent  for  free  silver  was  strongest,  and  delivered 
a  series  of  addresses  in  Iowa,  Nebraska,  and  Col 
orado,  and  on  the  Pacific  slope.  According  to 
the  newspapers  of  the  day  his  arguments  made  a 
deep  impression. 

In  1898  the  money  question  again  came  be 
fore  Congress,  when  the  Senate  passed  a  concur 
rent  resolution  to  the  effect  that  the  bonds  of  the 
United  States  were  payable,  at  the  option  of  the 
Government,  in  silver  dollars  containing  412.5 
grains  of  standard  silver,  and  that  to  restore  to 

53 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

its  coinage  such  silver  coins  as  a  legal  tender  in 
payment  of  the  Government's  bonds  is  "  not  a 
violation  of  the  public  faith  nor  in  derogation 
of  the  rights  of  the  public  creditor."  In  the  de 
bate  on  the  resolution  in  the  House,  where  it 
was  overwhelmingly  rejected,  Mr.  McCall  said: 

In  standing  in  opposition  to  this  resolution,  and  also 
in  favor  of  the  maintenance  of  the  gold  standard,  the 
Representatives  from  Massachusetts  are  not  unmindful 
of  the  history  of  the  State  they  represent.  They  remem 
ber  that  during  the  war  of  the  rebellion,  when  that  State 
might  have  paid  the  interest  upon  its  bonds  in  a  greatly 
depreciated  currency,  it  paid  that  interest  in  gold,  and 
as  a  result  of  its  scrupulous  honor  within  ten  years  we 
have  seen  the  bonds  of  that  Commonwealth  selling  in 
the  public  markets  of  this  country,  subject  though  they 
were  to  taxation,  above  the  untaxed  bonds  of  the  Na 
tional  Government. 

A  high  public  credit  is  not  merely  ornamental,  but  it 
is  also  in  the  highest  degree  useful.  It  both  sustains  and 
decorates  a  nation.  It  gives  it  the  means  of  equipping 
armies,  of  building  fleets,  and  of  maintaining  a  struggle 
for  its  national  existence.  The  great  Junius  never  ut 
tered  a  more  brilliant  epigram  nor  a  greater  truth  than 
when,  speaking  of  the  public  credit  of  England,  he  said, 
"Public  credit  is  wealth  j  public  honor  is  security.  The 
feather  that  adorns  the  royal  bird  supports  its  flight. 
Strip  it  of  its  plumage  and  you  fix  it  to  the  earth."  [Ap 
plause  on  the  Republican  side.] 

You  are  in  a  business  that  is  not  only  paltry  and  mis- 

54 


TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

erable,  but  disastrous  as  well,  when  you  would  utter 
again  this  forgotten  expression  of  the  emotion  of  twenty 
years  ago  to  tarnish  the  fair  fame  of  your  country. 

The  repeal  of  the  Sherman  Silver  Purchase 
Act  was  by  far  the  most  important  legislative 
achievement  of  the  first  Congress  in  which  Mr. 
McCall  served.  Another  measure  bearing  upon 
the  finances  of  the  Government  which  was  intro 
duced  at  this  Congress  was  an  act  permitting  the 
States  to  tax  the  legal-tender  notes  of  the  Fed 
eral  Government.  It  was  doubtful  whether  Con 
gress  had  the  constitutional  right  thus  to  place 
the  agencies  of  the  Federal  Government  at  the 
mercy  of  the  States,  and,  whether  it  had  the 
power  or  not,  the  wisdom  of  such  a  measure  was 
more  than  doubtful.  In  the  debate  on  July  6, 
1894,  Mr.  McCall  said:  — 

Should  the  States  or  the  lesser  local  governments  of 
this  Union  be  permitted  to  tax  the  agencies  and  instru 
mentalities  of  the  National  Government  ?  Should  we 
permit  them  to  tax  the  obligations  of  that  Government, 
which  are  usually  employed  by  it  in  emergencies  to 
raise  money  and  to  preserve  its  very  existence  ?  The 
power  to  tax  is  the  very  highest  incident  of  sovereignty. 
The  power  to  tax  involves  the  power  to  destroy.  If 
Congress  can  grant  to  the  States  the  power  to  impose  a 
limited  tax  on  our  national  obligations,  it  can  grant  them 
the  power  of  free  and  unrestricted  taxation.  If  the 

55 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

authority  were  granted  to  the  States  to  tax  the  bonds 
or  the  demand  notes  of  the  National  Government,  they 
would  be  given  the  power,  practically,  to  destroy  these 
obligations,  and  consequently  the  Government  itself. . . . 

The  proposition  of  this  bill  is  hostile  to  the  public 
credit.  The  Government,  of  course,  will  be  able  to  bor 
row  money  more  cheaply  if  its  bonds  are  not  subject  to 
taxation.  But  you  say  the  greenback  is  not  a  bond  j  it 
is  simply  a  demand  note.  The  case  is  then  stronger  for 
the  non-taxing  of  the  demand  note.  In  the  case  of  a 
bond,  the  Government  borrows  money  by  paying  inter 
est.  In  the  case  of  a  greenback,  it  borrows  money  with 
out  paying  interest.  The  greenback  was  a  forced  loan 
made  in  a  grave  emergency  when  the  Government  was 
in  danger  of  destruction  in  the  time  of  war,  and  its  value 
was  increased  by  the  pledge  of  the  Government,  written 
upon  our  statute  books,  that  it  should  not  be  subject  to 
taxation. 

I  say  that  so  far  as  the  exemption  from  taxation  is 
concerned,  the  greenback  is  surrounded  with  more  sa 
cred  obligations  than  the  bond,  and  if  in  any  time  of 
war  or  disaster  that  may  in  the  future  fall  upon  this 
country  it  should  be  necessary  for  it  to  make  another 
emergency  loan  and  to  ask  the  money  of  the  people 
without  giving  them  any  interest  on  their  debt,  it  would 
be  vastly  to  the  advantage  of  the  Government  if  it 
should  religiously  have  observed  every  obligation  with 
reference  to  the  greenback.  .  .  . 

You  surrender  a  point  vital  to  the  sovereignty  of  this 
nation  when  you  subject  its  obligations  to  the  tax- 
gatherers  of  the  States  and  municipalities.  The  fine 

56 


TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

sentiment  for  the  national  honor  and  the  national  faith, 
especially  shown  in  the  support  of  this  very  greenback, 
and  which  stands  to  the  immortal  honor  of  the  Repub 
lican  party,  is  apparently  disregarded,  and  the  flag  which 
has  so  proudly  floated  at  the  mast-head  in  every  storm 
of  war  is  hauled  down  after  the  ship  has  reached  the 
peaceful  port. 

At  this  Congress  Mr.  McCall  introduced  a 
bill  providing  for  a  commission  to  promote  uni 
formity  of  state  laws  in  matters  of  common  in 
terest.  The  measure  was  defeated,  however,  be 
cause  of  the  extreme  adherence  to  the  doctrine 
of  state  rights  on  the  part  of  the  Democrats, 
who  controlled  the  House. 

When  Mr.  McCall  entered  Congress  the  merit 
system  of  appointment  to  office  was  still  on  the 
defensive.  Members  did  not  hesitate  openly  to 
stigmatize  its  advocates  as  "  foul-mouthed  dema 
gogues"  and  "Miss  Nancys,"  while  such  high- 
minded  leaders  as  Carl  Schurz  and  George  Wil 
liam  Curtis  were  even  denounced  as  "  traitors." 
The  merit  system  has  become  so  well  established 
that  invective  such  as  this  is  now  seldom  heard 
in  Congress,  even  though  the  actual  administra 
tion  of  the  civil  service  still  witnesses  many  re 
grettable  lapses  from  the  principles  on  which  it 
should  be  based.  President  Harrison  showed  his 
faith  in  the  principle  of  the  merit  system  and  his 

57 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

sincere  desire  to  make  it  effective  by  appoint 
ing  to  the  office  of  Civil  Service  Commissioner 
Theodore  Roosevelt,  who  had  taken  an  active 
part  in  securing  the  establishment  of  the  system. 
Of  his  achievements  in  that  office,  Mr.  McCall 
said  in  1894:  — 

A  great  deal  was  said  yesterday  concerning  the  Civil 
Service  Commission,  and  a  good  deal  more  of  Mr. 
Roosevelt;  but  concerning  that  gentleman  I  noticed 
that  the  charges  were  very  general  and  very  vague.  It 
was  alleged  against  him  that  he  was  a  Republican.  I 
regard  that  as  a  matter  mutually  complimentary  to  Mr. 
Roosevelt  and  to  the  Republican  Party.  But  this  I 
think  can  be  said,  that  no  man  has  made  any  specific 
issue  with  Mr.  Roosevelt  under  this  civil  service  law, 
be  he  Republican  or  be  he  Democrat,  who  has  cared  to 
repeat  the  experiment.  I  believe  that  from  the  founda 
tion  of  this  Government  to  the  present  day  there  has 
been  no  officer  who  has  more  zealously,  more  loyally, 
and  with  a  finer  public  spirit  performed  the  duties  of 
his  office  than  Theodore  Roosevelt  has  performed  the 
duties  of  Civil  Service  Commissioner.  [Applause  on  the 
Republican  side.] 

In  1898,  when  the  merit  system  was  severely 
attacked  in  the  House,  Mr.  McCall  made  a 
speech  in  which  he  entered  into  an  elaborate  ex 
amination  of  the  principles  upon  which  the  civil 
service  is  based  and  the  practice  of  the  govern 
ment  since  the  days  of  Washington. 
58 


TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

I  have  listened  with  a  good  deal  of  astonishment  to 
the  course  of  this  debate.  We  have  heard  the  old  spoils 
system  proclaimed  here  in  all  its  pristine  and  original 
corruption,  and  as  vigorously  as  it  was  ever  pronounced 
or  put  in  practice  by  Andrew  Jackson.  .  .  .  The  wide 
range  of  the  debate  makes  it  necessary  to  revert  not 
merely  to  these  early  teachings,  but  to  some  of  the  pri 
mary  notions  of  popular  government.  When  George 
Washington  was  put  at  the  head  of  the  Government 
there  may  have  been  factions,  but  there  were  no  parties, 
and  it  was  one  of  the  public  sorrows  of  that  great  man  that 
he  could  not  check  the  tendency,  so  certain  and  so  irre 
sistible  in  popular  government,  to  the  formation  of  parties. 

John  Adams  succeeded  to  the  office  and  the  political 
views  of  George  Washington,  and  the  first  appearance 
of  political  parties  in  their  full  development  was  during 
his  term.  Thomas  Jefferson  was  elected  President  after 
a  contest  as  heated  as  any  political  contest  we  wage 
to-day.  His  friends  demanded  to  be  recognized  with 
offices.  They  said  that  they  had  been  excluded  from  the 
government,  and  they  demanded  that  the  incumbents 
of  the  offices  should  be  removed  and  that  they  be  put  in 
their  places. 

Thomas  Jefferson  wrote — and  I  commend  this  to 
our  Democratic  friends  who  make  him  the  patron  saint 
of  their  party  —  a  letter  to  Dr.  Rush  about  three  weeks 
after  his  inauguration,  and  he  declared  that  his  party 
should  come  in  for  the  vacancies  that  might  occur  un 
til  something  like  an  equilibrium  between  the  parties 
should  be  restored,  but  that  he  would  not  create  va 
cancies  for  the  purpose  of  filling  them  with  his  sup- 

59 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

porters.  "Of  the  thousands  of  officers,  therefore,"  said 
he,  "  in  the  United  States,  a  very  few  individuals,  prob 
ably  not  twenty,  will  be  removed,  and  those  only  for 
doing  what  they  ought  not  to  have  done.  I  know  that  in 
stopping  thus  short  in  the  career  of  removals  I  shall  give 
great  offense  to  many  of  my  friends.  That  torrent  will 
be  pressing  me  heavily,  but  my  maxim  is  '  Fiat  justitia, 
ruat  coelum.'  "  In  his  eight  years  of  office  he  made  only 
thirty-nine  removals. 

In  Madison's  Administration  there  were  but  five 
removals,  in  Monroe's  eight,  and  in  John  Quincy 
Adams's  two.  So  that  during  the  first  forty  years  of  this 
Government,  of  men  holding  office  there  were  removed 
only  about  sixty,  all  told,  and  a  committee  of  this 
House,  which  carefully  investigated  the  facts,  reported 
that  during  these  forty  years  not  a  single  man  was  re 
moved  from  office  on  account  of  his  political  views. 
Then  Jackson  came  in.  He  had  a  verbal  record  upon 
this  question.  No  man  had  uttered  more  lofty  declara 
tions  against  the  evils  of  patronage  than  he.  One  of  the 
last  things  he  did  as  Senator  from  Tennessee  was  to  in 
troduce  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  prohibiting 
a  second  term  to  the  President,  in  order  to  avoid  the 
misuse  of  the  offices.  He  was  finally  elected  after  two 
very  warm  contests.  His  passions  were  aroused.  He 
was  a  man  who  believed  a  political  enemy  was  a  per 
sonal  foe.  He  had  plenty  of  bad  and  interested  advisers, 
although  his  hot  zeal  needed  no  kindling.  He  made  in 
discriminate  removals  and  looted  the  public  service  in  a 
way  that  has  made  him  the  envy  and  despair  of  every 
spoilsman  from  that  day  to  this. 

60 


TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

His  course  was  condemned  by  the  greatest  and  pur 
est  statesmen  of  both  parties  living  at  that  time.  Henry 
Clay  condemned  it.  He  said  that  course  followed  out 
would  destroy  popular  government  and  establish  a  des 
potism.  Daniel  Webster  condemned  it.  Calhoun  con 
demned  it,  and  it  was  not  supported  by  any  prominent 
man  who  is  to-day  known  as  a  statesman. 

Jackson's  doctrine  was  as  forcibly  stated  by  Swart- 
wout,  of  New  York,  as  by  Marcy.  He  declared  soon 
after  Jackson  was  elected  that  "  no  damned  rascal  who 
tried  to  keep  Adams  in  and  Jackson  out  was  entitled  to 
the  least  mercy  from  that  Administration  save  that  of 
hanging."  Swartwout  well  illustrated  in  his  own  person 
the  new  system  then  inaugurated.  He  was  made  col 
lector  of  the  port  of  New  York  and  promptly  proceeded 
to  make  way  not  only  with  his  own  salary,  but  with  the 
public  money  of  the  Government. 

The  proscription  put  in  practice  by  Jackson  invited 
counter  proscription  from  the  other  party,  so  that  as  the 
Administrations  alternated  from  that  time  until  the  time 
of  the  Civil  War,  each  Administration  tried  to  get  even 
with  the  one  that  had  preceded  it.  And  yet  an  attempt 
was  made  by  some  Administrations  to  do  away  with  the 
spoils  system.  .  .  . 

Let  us,  then,  get  the  spirit  of  our  own  history.  Omit 
ting  the  terms  of  Lincoln  and  Johnson,  when  the  great 
upheaval  of  the  Civil  War  and  the  stupendous  problems 
which  followed  it  rendered  a  thought  of  this  reform  out 
of  the  question,  we  find  the  spirit  of  our  first  forty 
years  against  the  spoils  idea,  and  the  last  thirty  years 
characterized  by  an  earnest  effort  on  the  part  of  all 

61 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

parties  to  return  to  the  earlier  and  better  practices  of 
the  fathers  of  the  Constitution. 

So,  I  ask  you  which  example  is  the  more  command 
ing  —  that  of  Washington  and  Jefferson  and  Adams  and 
Madison,  of  Grant  and  Garfield  and  Hayes  and  Mc- 
Kinley,  illustrating  and  adorning  seventy  years  of  our 
national  life,  or  the  proscription  of  Jackson,  followed 
by  the  counter  proscription  of  his  successors,  covering 
only  thirty  years  of  our  existence  and  denounced  by  the 
greatest  statesmen  of  that  era  ? 

He  fortified  his  argument  by  appealing  to  the 
experience  of  England,  where,  after  a  long  fight 
under  the  leadership  of  such  men  as  John  Bright 
and  Gladstone,  the  public  service  was  opened  to 
all  classes  in  the  community  and  any  man  might 
aspire  to  any  post  for  which  he  was  qualified. 
The  argument  in  favor  of  the  merit  system  was 
concisely  stated  and  both  parties  were  urged  to 
join  in  support  of  these  principles  which  would 
do  so  much  to  purify  public  life. 

I  will  enumerate  a  few  of  the  advantages  of  civil 
service  reform.  In  the  first  place  it  will  secure  a  more 
efficient  and  economical  public  service.  In  the  next 
place,  it  gives  to  all  who  desire  to  enter  the  service  an 
equal  opportunity  through  the  open  door  of  merit  and 
takes  away  from  the  privileged  few  the  power  to  pay 
their  political  debts  with  places  in  the  people's  service. 
It  lessens  the  power  of  bossism  and  favoritism,  already 

62 


TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

too  strong  in  this  country.  It  dries  up  most  fruitful 
sources  of  angry  political  contentions. 

It  takes  away  from  Congressmen  executive  powers 
which  they  have  so  long  usurped  and  gives  to  them  the 
time  to  perform  the  duties  which  are  theirs  under  the 
Constitution  and  which  they  were  elected  to  discharge. 
It  preserves  the  independence  of  the  legislative  branch 
of  the  Government,  which  is  destroyed  if  members  of 
Congress  are  continually  going  to  the  White  House 
and  importuning  the  President  for  offices.  I  can  show 
you  more  than  one  instance  where  appointments  have 
been  made  for  the  purpose  of  pushing  legislation 
through  the  two  Houses  of  Congress.  And  then  it 
secures  to  popular  elections  their  real  dignity  and  value, 
by  enabling  the  people  to  express  their  will  in  the 
choice  of  political  officers  free  from  the  corrupting 
influence  of  hundreds  of  thousands  of  placemen  on  the 
one  hand  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  place  hunters 
on  the  other. 

This  is  a  question  in  which  both  sides  of  the  House, 
aye,  the  whole  American  people,  are  interested.  The 
Democrats  believe  that  they  have  vital  principles,  and 
that  if  the  people  can  fairly  pass  upon  them  they  will 
pronounce  in  their  favor,  and  that  those  policies  and 
principles  will  be  put  in  force  for  the  benefit  of  the 
country.  We  believe  also  in  the  policies  and  principles 
which  we  advocate  on  this  side.  Let  us  then  join  hands 
and  take  away  the  corrupting  influence  of  these  thou 
sands  of  nonpolitical  offices,  and  then  the  policies  which 
you  represent  and  the  policies  which  we  represent  can 
be  submitted  in  the  great  constitutional  forum  and  can 

63 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

be  decided  by  a  free  and  unbought  expression  of  the  will 
of  the  American  people.  [Loud  applause  on  the  Repub 
lican  side.] 

A  subject  of  the  first  importance  to  the  com 
mercial  world  is  the  law  governing  bankruptcy. 
The  Constitution  vests  in  Congress  the  power  to 
enact  a  uniform  rule  on  the  subject,  but  during 
most  of  our  history,  its  regulation  has  been 
left  to  the  States.  From  1800  to  1803,  from 
1841  to  1843,  and  again  from  1867  to  1878  stat 
utes  in  exercise  of  the  power  of  Congress  were 
in  force,  but  in  nothing  has  the  jealousy  of  na 
tional  authority  been  manifested  more  strongly 
than  in  opposition  to  the  attempts  to  place  bank 
ruptcy  under  the  control  of  a  Federal  law.  The 
insolvency  laws  of  the  several  States  are  neces 
sarily  limited  in  their  operation  to  those  transac 
tions  over  which  the  States  enacting  them  have 
jurisdiction,  and  it  must  furthermore  be  said  that 
many  of  them  were  framed  with  little  regard  to 
the  just  rights  of  creditors.  In  1898,  when  the 
Bankruptcy  Act  which  is  now  in  force  was  pend 
ing  in  Congress,  Mr.  McCall  said:  — 

To-day  New  York  and  Charleston,  Baltimore  and 
New  Orleans,  are  nearer  together  than,  at  the  time  of 
the  framing  of  the  Constitution,  Boston  was  to  Salem 
or  to  Providence.  The  telegraph,  the  telephone,  and 


TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

the  frequent  fast-flying  mails  have  almost  annihilated 
distance,  and  our  nearly  180,000  miles  of  railroad  en 
able  us  now,  in  an  incredibly  short  space  of  time,  to 
transfer  from  one  State  to  another  great  masses  of 
freight  and  merchandise  which  one  hundred  years  ago 
were  as  immovable  as  mountains.  The  marvelous  instru 
mentalities  of  modern  commerce,  undreamed  of  one 
hundred  years  ago,  have  compelled  us  to  become  com 
mercially  one  people.  State  lines  are  eliminated.  The 
merchant  in  New  York  makes  a  trade,  in  his  own  office 
and  within  a  minute  of  time,  with  the  merchant  in 
Chicago,  and  it  becomes  absolutely  necessary  for  us  to 
exercise  this  great  power  entrusted  to  us,  this  great  duty 
enjoined  on  us,  the  performance  and  exercise  of  which 
have  become  so  vital  to  the  proper  regulation  of  com 
merce  and  trade.  .  .  . 

We  have  to-day  a  vast  number  of  men  in  this  coun 
try  who  are  hopelessly  in  debt.  This  bill  will  set  them 
upon  their  feet.  It  will  also  provide  a  rule  for  the  future, 
so  that  the  merchant  will  more  readily  send  his  mer 
chandise  across  state  lines.  He  will  be  willing  to  run  the 
chances  of  mismanagement  or  misfortune  of  his  debtor 
when  he  would  not,  in  addition  to  that  risk,  run  the 
chances  of  rascality  and  the  preferences  that  might  be 
secured  under  local  laws,  or,  if  he  did,  he  would  charge 
for  it.  Business  is  done  with  reference  to  all  the  risks 
to  which  it  is  subject.  If  there  is  an  extra  risk  by  rea 
son  of  the  lack  of  just  remedies,  that  risk  is  added  to 
the  price  of  the  goods ;  it  is  paid  in  the  end  by  the  con 
sumer,  so  that  in  the  last  analysis  the  cost  of  rascality 
is  borne  by  the  people.  .  .  . 

65 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

The  time  has  come  for  us  to  lift  a  heavy  millstone 
from  the  neck  of  industry;  to  bid  the  hundreds  of  thou 
sands  of  our  financially  maimed  and  crippled  fellow 
citizens  to  get  upon  their  feet  and  walk,  and  to  provide 
an  open  highway  over  which  the  overburdened  debtor 
of  to-day  and  of  the  future  may  walk  from  the  land  of 
hopeless  struggle  and  financial  bondage  into  a  position 
of  freedom. 

Congress  has  many  times  discussed  the  subject 
of  subsidies  for  American  shipping,  either  for  the 
purpose  of  building  up  the  American  merchant 
marine  or  for  facilitating  commercial  relations 
with  other  countries  by  providing  adequate  mail 
service.  The  latter  consideration  is  one  of  special 
importance,  and  when  a  measure  designed  to  as 
sist  the  establishment  of  mail  routes  to  South 
America  was  before  the  House,  in  1907,  Mr. 
McCall  said:  — 

The  academic  speeches  which  have  been  made  about 
subsidy  are  very  interesting,  and  I  agree  with  them  on 
general  principles,  but  they  do  not  deal  at  all  with  the 
question  involved  in  establishing  these  South  American 
lines.  It  is  a  power  prescribed  by  the  Constitution  to 
establish  mail  routes.  That  is  a  governmental  power, 
and  if  it  is  "  subsidy "  to  carry  our  mails  to  South 
America  in  the  first  instance  at  more  than  the  Govern 
ment  receives  for  postage,  then  why  was  it  not  "  sub 
sidy"  when  the  Government  established  and  maintained 
hundreds  of  routes  in  advance  of  civilization,  for  the 
66 


TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

development  of  the  country,  until  the  time  came  when 
the  postage  received  from  the  routes  would  pay  for  their 
maintenance?  If  this  is  "subsidy"  then  it  is  gross  "sub 
sidy  "  to  maintain  the  rural  free  delivery,  which  absorbs 
all  the  postage  received  from  the  routes  and  at  least 
$10,000,000  more  each  year.  So  I  assert  that  the  ob 
jection  of  subsidy  cannot  be  raised  to  this  proposition. 
The  question  simply  is:  Is  it  in  accord  with  a  sound 
public  policy  to  establish  these  South  American  routes 
—  and  that  is  the  particular  part  of  the  bill  to  which  I 
am  now  speaking —  and  is  the  compensation  reasonable  ? 

We  are  not  so  insular  and  contracted,  Mr.  Chair 
man,  that  we  will  establish  liberal  mail  facilities  where 
the  letter  starts  in  the  United  States  and  its  destination 
is  in  the  United  States,  and  yet  will  deny  our  people  the 
same  liberal  treatment  when  they  desire  to  trade  or  to 
communicate  with  the  people  of  other  lands.  The  inter 
national  mail  system  rests  upon  the  same  high  public 
ground  as  the  domestic  mail  system,  with  this  in  addi 
tion,  that  the  former  is  in  the  interest  of  peace,  that  it 
will  tend  to  bind  the  people  of  the  different  nations  to 
gether  and  create  a  community  of  interest  which  is  a 
powerful  influence  against  war;  and  in  that  view  it  sub 
serves  a  high  purpose  which  is  not  especially  subserved 
by  the  service  in  the  United  States. 

There  may  be  some  incidental  benefit  connected  with 
establishing  these  mail  routes,  but  I  do  not  think  gentle 
men  should  shudder  and  be  greatly  alarmed  lest  as  a 
result  of  this  policy  a  few  ships  should  be  built  in  Ameri 
can  shipyards.  The  total  cost  of  all  the  fleets  established 
by  this  bill  will  probably  not  exceed  two  battleships. 

67 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

This  is  not  a  very  munificent  provision  for  the  ship 
building  industry.  From  the  standpoint  of  peace,  these 
couriers  of  peace  traversing  the  ocean  will  be  a  more 
powerful  agency  against  war  than  the  two  battleships 
would  be. 

Another  measure  of  a  somewhat  prosaic  de 
scription,  but  which  will  do  a  great  deal  to  en 
hance  the  efficiency  of  the  House  as  a  legislative 
body,  owes  its  origin  and  adoption  to  Mr.  McCall. 
This  is  the  bill  for  rearranging  the  hall  of  the 
House.  The  chamber  in  which  the  House  sits  is 
altogether  too  large  to  serve  as  the  meeting-place 
of  a  deliberative  assembly.  Since  the  members 
can  hear  very  little  of  what  is  being  said,  noise 
and  confusion  result,  and  only  a  few  members  of 
stentorian  lung  power  possess  the  physical  abil 
ity  to  transmit  their  thoughts  to  their  colleagues. 
This  has  a  bad  effect  on  debate.  "  It  is  hard,"  said 
Lord  Bryce,  "  to  talk  hard  good  sense  at  the  top 
of  your  voice."  The  act  introduced  by  Mr.  Mc 
Call  provides  that  the  desks  for  members  shall 
be  removed,  and  that  the  area  of  the  chamber 
shall  be  greatly  reduced.  The  carrying-out  of 
these  alterations  will  make  the  sessions  of  the 
House  seem  less  like  an  open-air  meeting,  and 
will  enable  the  members  to  make  themselves 
heard  by  their  colleagues. 

In  1912  Mr.  McCall  introduced  into  Con- 
68 


TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

gress  a  proposal  to  amend  the  Constitution  by 
conferring  upon  Congress  the  power  to  pass  uni 
form  laws  regulating  the  hours  of  labor.  The 
comment  upon  this  suggestion  showed  how  easily 
a  public  man's  utterances  may  be  turned  against 
him  and  his  motives  misconstrued.  Many  news 
papers  pretended  to  believe  that  Mr.  McCall 
had  been  converted  from  a  conservative  into  a 
radical,  and  that  he  was  now  abandoning  his  ad 
vocacy  of  the  reserved  rights  of  the  States  in  favor 
of  a  centralized  government  in  Washington.  But 
a  study  of  Mr.  McCall's  arguments  upon  the 
Constitution  and  the  necessity  of  observing  its 
provisions  discloses  nothing  to  indicate  that  he 
thought  the  Constitution  was  an  unchanging  and 
unchangeable  instrument.  His  argument  simply 
was  that  when  the  need  for  change  became  ap 
parent,  the  change  should  be  made  by  a  straight 
forward  amendment  and  not  by  a  forced  and 
twisted  construction.  He  was  convinced  that 
manufacturers  in  States  where  the  hours  of  labor 
and  the  conditions  of  work  are  prescribed  by  law 
could  not  compete  upon  an  equality  with  manu 
facturers  in  States  which  had  no  such  regula 
tions. 

The  obvious  remedy  is  to  confer  authority  upon 
the  national  legislature  to  deal  with  a  subject  which 
is  of  national  importance.  The  advocacy  of  such 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

an  amendment  was  in  no  way  inconsistent  with 
his  insistence  upon  the  recognition  of  the  re 
served  rights  of  the  States. 

One  of  the  most  important  subjects  that  have 
come  before  Congress  since  the  Civil  War  is  the 
regulation  of  interstate  transportation.  The  inti 
mate  relation  that  exists  between  industry  and 
transportation,  and  the  control  which  great  rail 
way  systems  exert  over  the  fortunes  not  only  of 
individuals  and  corporations  but  of  cities  and 
States  make  the  question  of  the  regulation  of 
transportation  agencies  one  of  profound  interest 
to  every  part  of  the  country.  Unfortunately  the 
field  is  a  rich  one  for  the  demagogue.  Baiting 
the  railways  has  been  a  popular  sport  in  many 
localities,  and  one  who  ventured  to  question  the 
wisdom  of  every  fresh  twist  of  the  thumb-screw 
and  to  ask  for  the  same  degree  of  justice  for  the 
owners  of  the  railways  which  is  extended  to  other 
forms  of  property  invited  denunciation  as  a  tool 
of  the  interests  and  an  enemy  of  the  people.  Un 
doubtedly  there  were  evils  in  railway  management 
which  demanded  correction,  and  even  if  no  evil 
could  be  shown  it  is  doubtful  if  it  was  in  the  pub 
lic  interest  to  allow  the  prosperity  of  individuals 
and  of  communities  to  beat  the  mercy  of  groups 
of  men  who  were  not  under  public  control.  Rail 
way  regulation  is  necessary  and  proper,  but  this 
70 


TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

is  far  from  saying  that  every  measure  introduced 
for  that  purpose  should  be  adopted. 

Mr.  McCall  was  opposed  to  trenching  too  far 
upon  the  management  of  privately  owned  rail 
ways,  because  such  a  policy  would  tend  to  bring 
about  government  ownership.  As  to  this  he  said 
in  1905:  — 

The  ownership  of  transportation  lines  would  give  the 
National  Government  the  ready  means  to  usurp  the 
insignificant  powers  remaining  to  the  States.  One  party 
would  demand  that  the  railroads  should  not  be  operated 
on  Sundays,  another  party  would  contend  that  the  Gov 
ernment  should  not  transport  intoxicating  liquors,  still 
another  would  claim  that  veterans  or  other  classes  should 
ride  free,  and  others  would  urge  that  men  engaged  in 
kinds  of  business  at  the  time  obnoxious  should  not  be 
permitted  to  ride  at  all,  and  you  would  enter  upon  an 
era  of  extravagance,  of  favoritism,  and  of  centralization 
of  power  at  Washington  which  would  be  subversive  of 
our  Government  or  would  radically  change  its  char 
acter.  Take  off  the  lid  from  this  Pandora's  box  and  you 
will  see  everything  escape  except  hope. 

The  great  purpose  of  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Act  of  1 887  was  the  prevention  of  discrimination 
between  individuals  and  localities.  There  has 
never  been  much  complaint  in  any  part  of  the 
United  States  that  rates  were  too  high.  That 
question  has  seldom  been  raised  except  when  an 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

advance  in  rates  was  suggested.  But  discrimina 
tion  has  been  a  real  evil,  very  difficult  to  detect 
and  to  abolish.  By  rebates,  by  secret  rates  varying 
from  the  published  rates,  by  industrial  switches, 
private  cars,  refrigerator  cars  and  numerous 
other  devices,  one  shipper  was  given  a  preference 
over  another.  As  the  act  of  1887  proved  insuffi 
cient  to  meet  the  evil,  the  Elkins  law  of  1903 
was  passed,  but  for  some  years  no  serious  attempt 
was  made  to  enforce  it.  In  his  message  of  1904, 
President  Roosevelt  discussed  rebates  and  dis 
criminations,  and  proposed  as  a  remedy  that  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission  be  empowered 
to  fix  rates.  Just  why  it  would  be  any  more  diffi 
cult  for  a  railway  to  grant  a  rebate  on  a  rate  fixed 
by  the  Commission  than  on  a  rate  fixed  by  itself 
was  not  made  apparent. 

In  1906  Congress  enacted  the  Hepburn  Act 
by  which  authority  to  fix  rates  was  vested  in  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission.  Mr.  McCall 
had  supported  the  Elkins  Act  of  1903,  and  had 
advocated  that  the  Commerce  Commission  be 
made  a  prosecuting  body  with  ample  funds  at  its 
disposal  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  "  before  the 
courts  in  a  summary  fashion  any  rates  which  after 
investigation  it  believes  to  be  unjust,  unreason 
able,  or  unequal."  Let  the  number  of  judges  be 
enlarged  sufficiently  to  obtain  speedy  decisions, 

7* 


TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

and  then  trust  to  the  orderly  proceedings  of  the 
courts  to  determine  the  rights  involved.  But  he 
was  opposed  to  the  Hepburn  Act.  Not  only 
did  he  think  that  the  remedies  which  it  pro 
vided  were  not  adapted  to  the  removal  of  the 
evils  at  which  they  were  directed,  but  that  the 
bill  involved  a  dangerous  concentration  of  power 
in  the  National  Government.  We  have  often 
heard  lately  of  "  the  little  father  at  Washing 
ton."  He  first  made  his  appearance  in  Mr. 
McCall's  speech  of  February  7,  1905:  — 

The  enormous  concentration  and  pressure  of  power 
involved  in  the  attempt  to  have  the  National  Govern 
ment  run  our  railroads,  and,  as  a  result,  those  great 
engines  that  produce  the  articles  of  interstate  com 
merce,  would  be  to  engender  here  a  heated  center  of 
despotism  destructive  of  the  last  appearance  of  indi 
vidual  freedom.  Liberty  is  only  compatible  in  this 
country  with  keeping  the  management  of  their  affairs 
near  to  the  people,  where  they  can  see  how  they  are 
conducted.  Distant  as  they  are  from  Washington,  they 
get  merely  the  stage  effects,  and  the  actor  who  is  set 
down  to  play  all  the  virtuous  parts  in  the  play  may  be 
in  fact  the  real  villain.  A  system  like  ours,  with  the 
functions  of  government  distributed  among  different 
organs  and  localities,  is  tolerant  in  the  highest  degree 
of  freedom,  and  the  unshackled  liberty  of  millions  of 
men  employing  with  the  least  restraint  the  faculties 
God  has  given  them  is  what  has  produced  our  marvel- 

73 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

ous  development.  .  .  I  do  not  care  to  see  created  at 
Washington  a  "  little  father "  as  there  is  one  at  St. 
Petersburg.  For  my  part  I  prefer  the  American  system 
of  distributed  power,  with  as  much  as  possible  left  to 
the  individual,  rather  than  the  Russian  system  of  cen 
tralized  power. 

In  his  speech  in  opposition  to  the  Hepburn 
Act,  which  was  one  of  his  most  learned  speeches 
and  showed  a  wide  acquaintance  with  the  prac 
tices  of  other  countries  as  well  as  an  intimate 
knowledge  of  the  technicalities  of  rate-making, 
Mr.  McCall  said:  — 

So  far  as  favoritism  is  concerned,  in  every  one  of 
its  forms  I  am  opposed  to  it.  I  would  have  you  enact 
against  it  the  most  drastic  law  which  ingenuity  could 
devise.  And  I  would  have  the  right  of  every  man  to  a 
just,  reasonable,  and  equal  rate  taken  to  the  courts  at 
the  expense  of  the  Government,  in  the  first  instance, 
and  ultimately  of  the  railroads,  if  they  were  held  to  be 
in  the  wrong,  under  every  effective  species  of  remedy, 
taken  to  that  forum  where  Anglo-Saxon  freedom  has  won 
its  noblest  triumphs.  For  my  part  I  prefer  the  natural 
and  beneficent  liberty  of  the  courts  to  the  cast-iron  reg 
ulations  of  a  commission.  I  would  encourage  proceed 
ings  such  as  that  in  Scotland,  which  for  a  differential 
given  in  good  faith,  took  from  a  railroad  company  in 
damages  and  costs  about  $700,000. 

After  examining  the  economic  arguments  ad 
vanced  in  support  of  the  bill,  Mr.  McCall  con- 
74 


f  TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

eluded  his  great  speech  by  inquiring  what  effect 
such  a  law  must  have  upon  our  system  of  con 
stitutional  liberty:  — 

We  pass  laws  here  with  an  easy  optimism  and  a 
profound  faith  that,  so  great  are  the  American  people, 
their  prosperity  is  proof  even  against  vicious  govern 
ment.  And  so  the  two  great  parties,  in  playing  the 
game  of  politics,  sometimes  vie  with  each  other  in 
pandering  to  the  popular  passion  of  the  hour,  and 
court  the  roar  of  the  galleries  rather  than  history's  ap 
proved  voice.  Undoubtedly  the  splendid  strength  and 
youth  of  the  American  people  are  well-nigh  uncon 
querable,  but  no  state  was  ever  yet  so  great  that  a  per 
sistence  in  evil  courses  could  not  lay  it  low.  We  may 
presume  too  far.  If  we  are  guilty  of  reckless  and  im 
pulsive  action  here  we  may  wreck  the  nation.  If  you 
will  pardon  an  old  fable  :  As  the  boy  Phaeton,  driving 
the  horses  of  the  sun,  but  lacking  Apollo's  darting 
glance  and  unerring  touch  of  rein,  did  not  follow  the 
safe  middle  course,  and  thus  wrought  havoc  to  both 
the  earth  and  sky ;  so  by  impulse  and  unsteadiness  in 
driving  this  Washington  chariot  of  ours,  now  steering 
too  high  and  now  too  low,  we  may  put  our  American 
constellations  to  flight,  dry  up  the  courses  of  our  iron 
rivers,  and  make  of  our  fertile  prairies  the  sands  of 
another  Libya.  [Applause.] 

Mr.  McCall  was  one  of  the  seven  members  of 
the  House  who  voted  against  the  Hepburn  Act. 
He  prophesied  that  its  enactment  would  have  an 

75 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

unfavorable  effect  upon  the  business  of  the  rail 
ways  and  would  lead  to  an  increase  in  their  rates. 
Within  little  more  than  a  year  of  its  passage, 
the  country  had  one  of  the  most  acute  financial 
panics  that  it  has  ever  experienced.  Railway  rates 
have  increased,  while  confidence  in  railway  invest 
ments  has  so  diminished  as  to  check  very  ma 
terially  the  construction  of  new  roads,  and  the 
necessary  expansion  of  existing  roads  and  their 
efficient  operation  in  the  public  interest.  The 
number  of  miles  of  railway  which  have  gone 
into  the  hands  of  receivers  since  the  enactment 
of  the  Hepburn  Act  is  perhaps  not  altogether 
unconnected  with  the  provisions  of  that  law. 

While  the  debate  on  the  Hepburn  Act  was 
still  fresh  in  the  public  mind,  Mr.  McCall  came 
up  for  reelection.  The  following  letter  from  one 
of  the  most  acute  thinkers  in  the  country  is 
weighty  evidence  of  the  place  then  occupied  by 
Mr.  McCall  in  American  public  life:- 

CAMBRIDGE,  MASSACHUSETTS, 
November  i,  1906. 

HON.  DAVID  T.  DICKINSON, 

Cambridge,  Mass. 

DEAR  MR.  DICKINSON:  —  In  these  days,  when  the 
Democratic  Party  has  no  firm  hold  on  any  stable  politi 
cal  principles  and  tends  in  many  parts  of  the  country 
to  nominate  erratic  demagogues  as  candidates  for  high 


TWENTY  YEARS  OF  LEGISLATION 

positions,  a  courageous,  independent,  conservative,  forci 
ble  thinker  and  speaker  like  Mr.  McCall  renders  a  great 
service  to  the  dominant  party  and  the  country  by  sup 
plying  in  some  measure  the  empty  place  of  a  vigorous 
opposition.  It  has  been  a  great  satisfaction  to  me  for 
some  years  past  to  help  return  Mr.  McCall  to  Con 
gress,  and  I  hope  to  continue  to  enjoy  that  satisfaction 
so  long  as  I  live. 

Very  truly  yours, 

CHARLES  W.  ELIOT. 


CHAPTER    III 

CONSTITUTIONAL    QUESTIONS 

IT  has  sometimes  been  urged  as  a  reproach 
upon  American  public  life  that  all  discussion 
of  proposed  legislation  degenerates  into  a  debate 
as  to  constitutional  power.  The  merits  of  meas 
ures,  it  is  alleged,  are  quite  obscured  by  arguments 
as  to  the  authority  of  the  legislature  to  enact  them. 
There  is  undoubtedly  considerable  reason  for 
this  criticism.  Seldom,  indeed,  is  any  contentious 
measure  enacted  by  Congress  or  by  any  state 
legislature  which  is  not  at  some  stage  denounced 
as  unconstitutional.  When  the  opposition  finds 
itself  bereft  of  all  other  arguments,  it  falls  back 
upon  the  final  plea  that  the  proposed  legislation 
is  in  violation  of  the  fundamental  law.  How 
ever  objectionable  such  a  practice  may  be,  it 
has  some  undoubted  compensations.  This  plea 
keeps  constantly  before  the  people  the  nature  of 
their  system  of  government,  and  familiarizes  them, 
to  a  greater  degree  than  is  true  of  the  people  of 
any  other  country,  with  the  chief  concepts  of  their 
system  of  public  law.  The  value  of  such  discus 
sions  in  the  political  education  of  the  people  is 

78 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

enormous,  and  their  influence  in  preserving  the 
limitations  of  the  Constitution  is  incalculable. 

Mr.  McCall's  speeches  and  writings  show  that 
he  has  been  a  thoughtful  student  of  political  phi 
losophy,  and  that  he  is  familiar,  not  only  with 
the  working,  but  with  the  underlying  principles, 
of  the  chief  systems  of  government  of  both  ancient 
and  modern  times.  He  is  impressed  with  the 
soundness  of  the  principles  upon  which  the  Ameri 
can  Constitution  is  based  and  with  the  necessity 
of  their  faithful  observance.  This  does  not  mean 
that  he  regards  the  framework  of  our  Government 
as  perfect  and  incapable  of  improvement.  He  has 
voted  for  such  changes  as  the  election  of  United 
States  Senators  by  popular  vote,  and  he  intro 
duced  into  the  the  House  a  bill  for  amending 
the  Constitution  by  vesting  Congress  with  the 
power  to  regulate  hours  of  labor  throughout  the 
United  States.  Such  changes  as  these  are,  how 
ever,  mere  details.  They  do  not  affect  the  fun 
damentals  of  the  constitutional  system  by  which 
the  American  people  are  endeavoring  to  solve 
the  problem  of  reconciling  liberty  and  law,  and 
of  preserving  unity  without  that  uniformity  which 
tends  to  aristocracy  and  tyranny.  The  instru 
mentality  by  which  we  are  endeavoring  to  attain 
these  results  is  a  written  constitution  which  sets 
bounds  to  the  authority  of  the  governmental 

79 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

agents  whom  the  people  select.  This  can  be  effec 
tive  only  in  so  far  as  its  provisions  are  regarded. 
Mr.  McCall  might  have  taken  as  the  basis  of 
his  constitutional  discussions  Chief  Justice  Mar 
shall's  query,  "  To  what  purpose  are  powers  lim 
ited  and  to  what  purpose  is  that  limitation  com 
mitted  to  writing,  if  these  limits  may,  at  any  time, 
be  passed  by  those  intended  to  be  restrained  ? " 

It  was  while  Mr.  McCall  was  in  Congress  that 
the  strongest  effort  known  in  the  history  of  the 
country  was  made  to  magnify  the  authority  of 
the  Federal  Government  at  the  expense  of  the 
States.  Officials  who  were  anxious  to  "  do  things  " 
plainly  showed  their  impatience  under  the  re 
straints  imposed  by  the  Constitution.  Responsi 
ble  statesmen  in  public  speech  warned  the  States 
that  if  they  failed  in  the  performance  of  their  duty, 
"constructions"  of  the  Constitution  would  be 
"found  "  which  would  vest  the  necessary  author 
ity  in  the  Federal  Government.  It  was  a  danger 
ous  period  in  American  history  —  all  the  more 
dangerous  because  the  objects  which  those  in 
authority  sought  to  accomplish  were  in  general 
so  praiseworthy,  and  because  the  people  were  so 
impressed  by  what  they  would  gain  as  to  be 
almost  oblivious  to  what  they  would  lose.  It  was 
a  time  for  recourse  to  fundamental  principles,  and 
for  a  testing  of  the  new  statesmanship  by  an 
80 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

application  of  the  political  philosophy  upon  which 
the  American  Government  was  founded. 

On  Lincoln's  birthday,  1907,  Mr.  McCall 
delivered  an  address  before  the  Republican  Club 
of  New  York  City  on  "The  Importance  of  pre 
serving  the  Constitutional  Balance  between  the 
Federal  Government  and  the  States."  The  ad 
dress  attracted  wide  attention  and  the  House  of 
Representatives  ordered  it  printed  in  the  "  Con 
gressional  Record."  It  was  one  of  Mr.  McCall's 
most  thoughtful  speeches,  and  would  rank  high 
in  comparison  with  any  discussion  of  the  funda 
mental  principles  of  the  Constitution.  The  an 
niversary  upon  which  he  was  speaking  naturally 
suggested  Lincoln's  attitude  toward  the  States. 

Lincoln  might  easily  be  pardoned  if  the  consuming 
work  to  which  he  devoted  his  life  had  produced  in  his 
mind  an  undue  regard  for  the  National  as  against  the 
State  Governments  and  a  willingness  to  see  the  balance 
established  by  the  Constitution  destroyed.  But  while 
he  was  compelled  to  employ  every  power  in  the  great 
conflict  of  arms,  in  the  presence  of  which  the  Consti 
tution  and  all  other  laws  were  silent,  he  was  in  the 
highest  degree  conservative  of  the  State  Governments. 
His  speeches  before  the  war  show  his  regard  for  the 
States,  but  it  is  more  significantly  proven  by  the  policy 
he  had  determined  upon  near  the  end  of  his  life,  a 
policy  which  rejected  the  "  conquered-province  "  theory 
of  the  status  of  the  seceding  States,  and  presented  a 

81 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

plan  so  mild,  so  constitutional,  and  so  opposed  to  the 
radicalism  of  the  moment  that  his  successor  was  over 
thrown  for  attempting  to  put  it  in  force. 

What,  then,  is  the  system  of  government  that  Lincoln 
stood  for  and  that  emerged  victorious  from  the  Civil 
War?  It  is  a  dual  system,  under  a  Constitution  which 
as  distinctly  reserved  powers  to  the  States  and  the  peo 
ple  as  it  granted  others  to  the  National  Government. 
It  was  thus  presented  by  the  Supreme  Court  after  the 
war,  and  in  the  light  of  the  consequences  of  that 
struggle :  "  it  may  not  be  unreasonably  said  that  the 
preservation  of  the  States  and  the  maintenance  of  their 
governments  are  as  much  within  the  design  and  care 
of  the  Constitution  as  the  preservation  of  the  Union 
and  the  maintenance  of  the  National  Government.  The 
Constitution  in  all  its  provisions  looks  to  an  indestruct 
ible  union  composed  of  indestructible  States."  Nulli 
fication  by  States  of  the  action  of  the  National  Gov 
ernment  would  be  entirely  repugnant  to  this  system, 
but  no  more  repugnant  than  usurpation  by  the  Na 
tional  Government  of  the  powers  reserved  to  the 
States.  Either  would  be,  in  substance,  precisely  what 
South  Carolina  tried  to  do  and  would  be  destructive  of 
our  constitutional  system.  If  the  forces  of  disunion, 
the  centrifugal  forces,  were  permitted  to  have  sway, 
the  States  would  fly  from  their  orbits  and  cease  to  re 
volve  about  the  Central  Government.  On  the  other 
hand,  if  the  centripetal  forces  were  given  unchecked 
domination  the  powers  of  the  States  would  be  drawn 
by  attraction  of  gravitation  to  the  central  authority, 
they  would  become  the  mere  shadows  of  governments 

82 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

and  a  powerful  central  despotism  would  be  the  result. 
Whether  you  may  favor  the  one  system  or  the  other 
it  is  enough  to  say  that  neither  one  is  the  balanced 
system  established  by  the  American  Constitution. 

Advocates  of  the  new  nationalism,  to  be  sure, 
proposed  to  limit  the  expansion  of  Federal  au 
thority  to  "  fields  of  necessary  control.'* 

But  who  is  to  decide,  in  the  first  instance,  what  are 
u  fields  of  necessary  control  "  ?  Obviously  the  gentle 
men  who  wish  to  exercise  the  control.  .  .  .  And  a 
given  field  of  u  necessary  control "  having  been  taken 
possession  of  by  the  National  Government,  a  construc 
tion  will  be  found  to  keep  it  under  control.  This 
theory,  it  is  needless  to  say,  would  erect  usurpation 
into  a  constitutional  system.  .  .  . 

Mr.  McCall  then  attacked  the  fundamental 
assumption  of  the  argument  for  the  expansion 
of  the  Federal  authority  by  construction  by  show 
ing  that  the  charge  of  inefficiency  brought  against 
the  State  Governments,  as  compared  with  the 
Federal  Government,  was  not  warranted  by  the 
facts.  The  Federal  Government  has  been  cred 
ited  with  an  "imagined  perfection"  which  it 
does  not  possess.  "  The  railroads,"  he  said, 
"  have  been  built  almost  entirely  through  state 
agencies.  But  one  railroad,  the  Union  Pacific, 
was  constructed  under  national  control,  and  the 
Credit  Mobilier  and  other  scandals  associated 

83 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

with  it  almost  shook  the  Government  to  its 
base."  In  the  District  of  Columbia,  where  the 
national  authority  has  full  sway,  the  corporation 
laws  "would  make  a  New  Jerseyman  blush." 

In  any  consideration  of  the  relation  between 
the  Federal  Government  and  the  States,  the  vast 
size  of  the  country  and  the  diversity  of  interests 
of  its  several  sections  must  be  remembered. 

It  is  a  slow  process  to  develop  a  homogeneous  public 
opinion  in  so  populous  and  scattered  a  people.  Diversity 
of  interests  will  develop  diversity  of  opinions  in  differ 
ent  groups  of  States.  These  diverse  and  conflicting  in 
terests  will  often  bring  into  play  forces  that  neutralize 
each  other  and  prevent  all  national  action.  Or  in  cases 
where  a  uniform  sentiment  is  aroused  the  impetus  of 
so  great  a  body  of  opinion  is  overwhelming,  reason 
loses  its  force,  and  the  most  extreme  course  is  liable  to 
be  taken.  The  failure  of  the  effort  to  retire  in  times  of 
peace  the  forced  loan  of  the  Government  put  out  in  war 
and  the  many  compromises  regarding  silver  illustrate 
the  balancing  of  forces,  while  Reconstruction,  which 
resulted  from  an  unmistakable,  widespread,  and  uncon 
trollable  public  opinion,  illustrates  unreasonable  and 
extreme  action.  Reconstruction  was  pressed  through 
by  patriots  and  statesmen  at  Washington,  acting  in  ig 
norance  of  local  conditions,  and  it  produced  a  condi 
tion  of  things  which  made  it  necessary  for  the  people 
of  the  States  affected  to  resort  to  violence  and  fraud  in 
order  to  save  civilization.  Burke  says  repeal  is  more 
blessed  than  enactment;  but  when  a  law  once  finds  its 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

way  upon  our  national  statute  books,  it  requires  almost 
a  revolution  to  repeal  it.  Witness  so  necessary  a  meas 
ure  as  the  silver  repeal,  which  Cleveland  was  able  to 
secure  only  through  the  disruption  of  his  party. 

The  political  philosophy  underlying  the  Amer 
ican  constitutional  system  was  thus  expounded  : — 

The  founders  of  our  Government  were  jealous  of 
power.  They  aimed  to  secure  liberty  —  first,  by  pro 
tecting  the  individual  against  the  encroachments  of  gov 
ernment,  and  second,  by  retaining  the  maximum  of 
governmental  powers  in  those  governmental  organs  near 
to  the  people.  They  knew  that  mankind  had  suffered 
quite  as  greatly  from  too  much  as  from  too  little  gov 
ernment  and  that  uncounted  millions  of  men  had 
groaned  under  its  persecutions  and  exactings;  that  gov 
ernments  were  very  apt  to  be  conducted  for  the  benefit 
of  those,  or  of  the  favorites  of  those,  who  wielded  them, 
and  that  the  creation  of  an  enormous  central  engine  of 
authority  would  be  subversive  of  individual  freedom. 
They  knew  that  bad  men,  honest  and  fanatical  men, 
had  often  secured  control  of  governments  and  had  made 
of  them  scourges  more  deadly  than  the  earthquake  or 
the  pestilence.  And  their  jealousy  of  unrestrained  power 
was  as  justifiable  as  it  was  profound. 

Francis  Lieber  has  said  that  we  do  not  enjoy  liberty 
by  grace  of  government,  but  by  limitations  upon  its 
powers.  This  is  precisely  the  theory  upon  which  our 
Government  was  founded.  Freedom  inhered  in  the  in 
dividual,  and  powers  not  granted  were  expressly  re 
served.  And  the  proposition  to  take  them  away  by 

85 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

u  construction  "  in  any  supposed  emergency  is  only  a 
part  of  the  unending  conflict  between  autocracy  and 
liberty. 

The  cautious  grant  of  powers  to  the  Central  Gov 
ernment,  the  express  limitations  imposed  upon  them, 
the  reservation  of  other  important  powers  to  the  sub 
ordinate  governments  with  limitations  again,  made  of 
our  Constitution  by  far  the  most  tolerant  of  liberty  of 
any  system  ever  established.  The  States  are  ideally 
constituted  to  deal  with  the  great  mass  of  questions 
relating  to  personal  government.  They  do  not  possess 
the  war  power.  They  can  have  no  foreign  policies,  and 
the  most  important  cause  of  governmental  infatuation 
and  of  dangerous  ambition  is  thus  taken  away.  They 
conduct  their  operations  under  the  very  eyes  of  the 
people,  and  there  is  far  less  temptation  to  theatric  gov 
ernment  than  where  actors  are  performing  to  very  large 
and  very  distant  galleries  and  in  order  to  thrill  them 
are  compelled  to  make  up  too  heavily  to  impose  upon 
nearer  spectators.  They  deal  especially  with  the  hum 
drum  but  vital  concerns  of  everyday  life,  and,  by  an 
apportionment  of  their  powers  among  towns  and  coun 
ties,  the  people  not  only  have  an  opportunity  of  know 
ing  how  government  is  conducted,  but  they  have  an 
opportunity  to  engage  in  it.  They  feel  a  practical  re 
sponsibility  for  it,  see  that  its  affairs  are  really  their 
own,  and  instead  of  being  like  the  political  upholsterer 
of  Addison,  who  was  taken  up  with  the  concerns  of 
the  King  of  Sweden  or  some  other  distant  monarch 
while  he  neglected  his  own,  they  acquire  a  practical 
and  vital  interest  in  it  and  deal  with  it  through  their 

86 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

senses  and  reason  instead  of  their  imagination.  We  thus 
see  our  system  of  government  springing  from  a  broad 
base  and  extending  by  a  gradual  and  easy  slope  to  the 
summit  of  power  which  rests  as  lightly  as  does  the  top 
most  point  of  a  pyramid  upon  the  mass  beneath.  How 
much  better  this  than  a  jutting  and  overhanging  mass 
of  power  at  the  very  top,  oppressing  the  people  below 
with  its  intolerable  weight  until,  in  the  providence  of 
God,  it  topples  over. 

In  the  effort  to  enlarge  the  functions  of  the 
Federal  Government,  the  achievements  of  the 
States  and  particularly  the  accomplishment  of 
individuals  were  belittled  and  overlooked.  In 
the  struggle  of  mankind  toward  better  things,  it 
is  the  individual  rather  than  government  who 
has  usually  been  responsible  for  the  advance. 
The  best  service  that  government  can  render  is 
that  of  protection  to  the  individual  while  he 
works  out  the  problems  of  the  race. 

The  individual  citizen  has  not  done  badly.  What 
reason  is  there  for  the  deification  of  the  Federal  office 
holder  ?  Our  contributions  to  astronomy  have  been 
made,  not  by  the  magnificent  Government  instruments 
at  Georgetown,  but  by  the  private  and  often  humble 
institutions  of  the  country.  The  effect  of  drugs  upon 
the  human  system  has  been  disclosed,  not  by  the  chief 
of  the  poison  squad  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture, 
ostentatiously  trumpeting  information  already  known 
to  every  sophomore  in  medicine,  but  by  research  carried 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

on  in  a  hundred  schools.  Our  marvelous  inventions 
and  all  our  other  gifts  to  civilization  have  come  from  the 
splendid  body  of  our  private  citizenship,  containing 
uncounted  men  fitted  to  honor  our  highest  offices.  And 
as  our  chief  source  of  greatness  in  the  past  has  been  in 
the  cherishing  freedom  which  has  stimulated  that  citi 
zenship,  so  will  our  hope  for  the  future  be  in  the  con 
tinuance  of  that  freedom.  Our  citizens  may  be  trusted 
to  learn  how  to  spell  and  how  to  regulate  their  diets 
and  their  baths  without  too  much  governmental  assist 
ance  from  Washington. 

The  time  may  come  when  the  muckraker  shall  sit 
in  the  seat  of  the  publicist  and  the  sensational  dema 
gogue  take  the  place  of  the  statesman,  and  when  we 
shall  be  given  over  to  the  heralds  of  a  statutory  millen 
nium  who  would  make  everybody  equal  and  perfect 
by  penal  enactment.  But  I  trust  the  Republican  Party 
will  make  it  its  first  duty  to  resist  the  coming  of  that 
day,  and  while  always  ready  to  exercise  when  necessary 
any  national  power  in  its  full  vigor,  that  it  will  safe 
guard  the  autonomy  of  the  States,  so  that  those  who  dwell 
in  America  hereafter  may  continue  to  enjoy  that  rounded 
and  symmetrical  system  of  free  government  preserved 
and  handed  down  to  us  under  that  greatest  of  Repub 
lican  statesmen,  whose  career  we  to-day  commemorate, 
and  to  the  end,  too,  that  in  the  words  of  the  immortal 
message  from  Gettysburg,  "  government  of  the  people, 
by  the  people,  for  the  people  shall  not  perish  from  the 
earth." 

Mr.  McCall  attached  so  much  importance  to 
the   preservation    of  the    balance    between    the 
88 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

Federal  Government  and  the  States  as  a  means 
of  guarding  the  liberty  of  the  individual  that 
later  in  the  same  year  he  returned  to  this  theme, 
and  at  the  Jamestown  Exposition,  on  September 
17,  1907,  —  the  anniversary  of  the  signing  of 
the  Constitution  and  of  Washington's  Farewell 
Address,  —  he  spoke  eloquently  of  the  attempt 
of  the  framers  of  the  Constitution  to  reconcile 
order  with  liberty,  and  of  the  success  which  had 
followed  their  efforts.  If  the  Constitution,  he 
said,  "has  thwarted  some  adventurous  designs 
and  set  at  naught  the  crude  and  callow  projects 
of  inexperience,  that  was  one  of  the  things  it  was 
supremely  designed  to  do." 

In  eulogizing  the  Constitution,  however,  Mr. 
McCall  had  no  intention  of  representing  it  as  hav 
ing  reached  such  a  state  of  perfection  as  to  be  in  no 
need  of  change.  His  contention  simply  was  that  if 
change  was  necessary  it  should  be  made  in  the  pre 
scribed  way  and  not  by  so-called  "construction." 

If  amendments  are  desirable,  there  is  a  way  provided 
for  their  adoption.  And  upon  this  day,  which  is  the 
anniversary  of  the  Farewell  Address,  as  well  as  of  the 
final  action  of  the  Convention,  we  may  well  ponder 
upon  those  weighty  words  spoken  by  that  great  soldier 
and  statesman,  to  whom  more  than  to  any  other  man 
we  are  indebted  for  our  independence  and  our  National 
Government.  "  If  in  the  opinion  of  the  people,"  said 


'  SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

George  Washington  one  hundred  and  eleven  years  ago 
to-day,  uthe  distribution  or  modification  of  the  constitu 
tional  powers  be  in  any  particular  wrong,  let  it  be  cor 
rected  by  amendment  in  the  way  the  Constitution  des 
ignates.  But  let  there  be  no  change  by  usurpation  j  for, 
though  this  in  one  instance  may  be  the  instrument  of 
good,  it  is  the  customary  weapon  by  which  free  govern 
ments  are  destroyed.  The  precedent  must  always  greatly 
overbalance  in  permanent  evil  any  partial  or  transient 
benefit  which  the  use  can  at  any  time  yield." 

But  it  is  proposed  to  expand  the  Constitution  by 
"  construction."  So  far  as  the  rules  of  interpretation 
are  concerned,  they  should,  of  course,  be  applied,  not 
with  the  technical  narrowness  employed  in  construing 
penal  statutes,  but  with  the  liberality  befitting  the 
organic  act  of  a  government  in  which  general  terms 
must  necessarily  be  used.  But  if  under  the  pretense  of 
exercising  a  granted  power  a  power  not  granted  is  put 
in  force,  then  we  should  have  substantially  that  usurpa 
tion  which  would  fall  under  the  denunciation  of  George 
Washington. 

After  quoting  Mr.  Gladstone's  rhetorical  flour 
ish,  to  the  effect  that  our  Constitution  is  "  the 
most  wonderful  work  struck  off  at  a  given  time 
by  the  brain  and  purpose  of  man,"  Mr.  McCall 
compares  our  form  of  government  with  that  of 
some  other  countries  for  the  purpose  of  noting 
its  distinctive  feature  :  — 

To  my  mind  the  distinctive  thing  about  the  Amer 
ican  Constitution,  which  indelibly  stamps  its  character, 
90 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

is  that  it  embodied  an  experiment  before  that  time  un 
known,  and  established  a  government  upon  the  corner 
stone  of  the  individual,  making  him  for  certain  essential 
purposes  of  freedom  superior  even  to  the  Government 
itself.  In  other  nations,  whatever  liberty  there  was  had 
commonly  appeared  in  the  form  of  concessions  and 
grants  from  sovereigns  to  the  people.  The  kings  ruled 
by  a  claim  of  divine  right.  Whatever  of  liberty  the 
people  enjoyed  came  by  gift  from  the  king,  and  what 
ever  authority  was  not  granted  by  the  king  remained 
vested  in  him.  But  the  American  Constitution  reversed 
all  that.  It  proceeded  from  the  people.  The  Government 
which  it  established  was  one  of  limited  powers.  Every 
power  that  it  possessed  was  delegated  by  the  people, 
and  every  power  not  granted  was  expressly  reserved  to 
the  people  or  to  some  of  the  governmental  organs  which 
they  had  previously  established.  The  original  Constitu 
tion  was  framed  upon  this  theory,  but  that  there  might 
be  no  doubt  about  it,  at  least  six  of  the  States,  and 
among  them  Virginia  and  Massachusetts  and  New 
York,  accompanied  their  ratification  by  resolutions 
making  an  express  construction  that  all  powers  not 
granted  were  reserved  ;  and  the  first  Congress  submitted 
among  the  amendments  embodying  the  Bill  of  Rights, 
the  Tenth  Amendment,  declaring  that  "  the  powers 
not  delegated  to  the  United  States  by  the  Constitution, 
nor  prohibited  by  it  to  the  States,  are  reserved  to  the 
States  respectively  or  to  the  people."  This  amendment 
was  immediately  ratified  and  placed  in  the  Constitu 
tion.  It  is  there  even  more  impressively  than  if  it  had 
been  made  a  part  of  the  original  instrument,  and  it 

91 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

deals  a  death-blow  to  the  theory  that  our  Government 
has  about  it  any  u  divine  right "  or  any  u  inherent 
power,"  or  any  power  that  is  not  contained  in  the  ex 
press  grant.  To  my  mind,  therefore,  the  striking  thing 
in  the  American  Constitution,  which  differentiates  it 
from  the  previously  formed  constitutions  of  all  other 
nations,  is  the  manner  in  which  it  imposed  limitations 
upon  government,  recognizing  that  all  power  originally 
resided  in  the  people,  and  that  no  government  had  any 
species  of  authority  over  them  which  they  did  not  ex 
pressly  grant. 

We  Americans  as  a  people  are  easily  impressed 
by  mere  bulk.  It  pleases  us  to  think  that  in  terri 
torial  extent  we  are  the  largest  of  the  great  powers ; 
that  the  population  of  the  United  States  exceeds 
that  of  any  other  one  country,  exclusive  of  its  de 
pendencies,  except  only  China  and  Russia;  that 
more  than  half  the  total  railway  mileage  of  the 
world  lies  in  the  United  States;  that  no  other 
country  has  so  many  cities  with  more  than  a  mil 
lion  inhabitants  as  has  this  country,  —  and  other 
facts  of  a  similar  degree  of  importance  or  unim 
portance.  But  we  do  not  so  easily  perceive  that 
the  larger  the  country  and  the  more  numerous  its 
population,  the  less  important  is  each  individual 
and  the  more  he  is  obscured  by  the  size  of  the 
community  to  which  he  belongs. 

Herein  lies  another  reason  for  maintaining  the 
autonomy  of  the  States. 
92 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

A  great  central  government  exerting  its  authority  in 
all  governmental  matters  over  a  vast  and  scattered  popu 
lation  necessarily  takes  on  an  autocratic  character.  The 
part  of  each  individual  in  such  a  government  becomes 
so  infinitesimal  and  diluted  that  it  vanishes  almost  en 
tirely  as  an  appreciable  force.  The  wide  range  of  powers 
heretofore  exercised  under  the  Constitution  by  the  States 
gives  an  opportunity  to  the  individual  citizen  to  bear  an 
appreciable  part  in  actual  government.  The  historian 
Freeman,  in  comparing  small  states  with  great  ones,  said 
that  a  u  small  republic  develops  all  the  faculties  of  indi 
vidual  citizens  to  the  highest  pitch.  The  average  citizen 
of  such  a  state  is  a  superior  being  to  the  average  citizen 
of  a  large  kingdom.  He  ranks,  not  with  its  average  sub 
jects,  but  at  the  very  least  with  its  average  legislators." 
I  have  given  the  obvious  reason.  In  a  small  community 
resting  upon  suffrage,  which  is  practically  universal,  the 
average  citizen  takes  part  in  the  actual  work  of  govern 
ment,  and  is  disciplined  by  it,  while  in  a  very  large  nation 
he  is  practically  a  spectator.  In  the  one  case  participa 
tion  in  government  will  beget  a  facility  for  it,  and,  dealing 
with  subjects  at  close  range,  his  practical  sense  instead 
of  his  imagination  will  be  brought  into  play.  But  where 
he  is  a  spectator  looking  at  transactions  taking  place 
upon  a  distant  stage,  the  thing  that  stages  well  is  the  thing 
that  will  command  his  attention.  The  rotund  chest  and 
swelling  shoulders  of  the  hero  may  be  only  sawdust,  but 
the  effect  upon  the  distant  onlooker  will  be  the  same.  He 
is  dealing  with  things  which  may  or  may  not  be  real.  The 
opportunity  for  deception  is  great,  the  chance  of  detection 
small.  The  ideal  condition  is  that  provided  by  our  sys- 

93 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

tem.  We  can  have  the  protection,  the  security,  and  the 
sense  of  national  pride  attending  a  great  nation,  and 
we  can  at  the  same  time  be  free,  in  conjunction  with 
those  in  our  immediate  neighborhoods,  to  manage  our 
local  affairs  in  our  own  way,  without  the  intermeddling 
of  an  autocrat. 

Whatever  faults  the  people  of  the  United  States 
may  have  developed,  their  most  stringent  critics 
will  admit  that  in  most  situations  they  have  dis 
played  a  robust  common  sense,  which,  when  they 
have  taken  time  for  reflection,  has  saved  them 
from  serious  blunders.  But  there  is  always  the 
danger  that  in  some  critical  situation  we  may  yield 
to  the  blandishments  of  an  impatient  statesman 
who  wishes  to  "do  things."  It  is  then  that  the 
restraints  of  the  Constitution  are  most  valuable. 

The  mortal  disease  of  democracies  is  the  dema 
gogue.  It  is  so  easy  to  make  the  most  prosperous  peo 
ple  think  they  are  ill-treated  and  badly  off;  it  is  so 
easy  to  use  the  property  of  a  small  class  to  bribe  the 
members  of  a  large  class,  that  unscrupulous  politicians 
in  all  ages  have  found  a  ready  means  to  advance  their 
fortunes  under  democratic  goverments.  The  makers  of 
our  Constitution  were  well  aware  of  this  danger,  and 
they  made  careful  provision  against  the  demagogue. 
They  knew  that  often  history  condemned  what  the 
crowd  at  the  moment  applauded.  They  safeguarded 
liberty  and  property,  imposed  checks  against  hasty  ac 
tion,  so  that  the  people  might  have  time  to  think  and 

94 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

form  an  opinion  worthy  of  the  name,  and  they  carefully 
distributed  power  among  the  three  great  departments  of 
government.  The  system  has  worked  admirably. 

That  was  an  impressive  dictum  of  Montesquieu,  that 
u  there  is  no  liberty  if  the  judiciary  be  not  separated  from 
the  legislative  and  executive  powers."  The  independent 
judiciary  of  the  United  States,  standing  apart  and  coldly 
scrutinizing  in  the  light  of  the  Constitution  the  action  of 
the  other  departments,  has  proven  a  most  effective  guar 
dian  of  liberty. 

The  House  of  Representatives,  fresh  from  the  people, 
is  sure  to  voice  the  immediate  popular  demand.  The 
Senate,  differently  constituted,  acts  with  more  deliberate 
reserve,  although  its  efficiency  would  be  increased  and 
its  conservatism  in  no  degree  lessened  if  the  democratic 
principle  were  not  so  grossly  violated  in  its  composition. 
The  Constitution  so  invested  the  President  with  power 
at  the  same  time  that  it  decorated  him  with  honor  that  it 
satisfied  his  ambition  and  sobered  him  with  the  weight  of 
great  responsibilities.  And  our  Presidents  have  usually 
been  a  great  conservative  force,  and  more  than  once 
they  have  not  hesitated  to  step  into  the  cold  light  of 
unpopularity  if  they  might  thereby  advance  their  coun 
try's  honor.  Sailing  before  the  wind  has  not  been  a 
favorite  pastime  with  American  Presidents ;  their  great 
deeds  often  have  been  at  the  time  unpopular.  Washing 
ton  breathed  the  popular  fury  when  he  issued  his  procla 
mation  of  neutrality,  but  he  struck  a  mighty  blow  for 
the  independence  of  our  foreign  relations.  Cleveland 
heroically  braved  a  widespread  sentiment  and  sacrificed 
his  popularity  in  order  to  preserve  the  standard  of  value 

95 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

of  our  money.  And  when  the  printing-presses  were  to 
be  set  in  motion  and  the  national  bondholders  were  to 
be  paid  in  paper,  Grant, the  silent,  inflexible  soldier,  who 
was  always  a  hero  unless  upon  dress  parade,  interposed 
his  veto  against  inflation.  The  result  of  the  workings 
of  our  institutions  has  been  seen  in  a  progress  which 
has  conserved,  and  while  we  have  made  haste  slowly  we 
have  outstripped  all  other  nations. 

Thus  the  Constitution  has  safely  carried  us  through 
the  most  rapidly  moving  century  the  world  has  ever 
seen.  It  has  shown  itself  equal  to  this  great  era.  How 
will  it  ride  the  tumbling  waters  of  the  century  that  has 
just  dawned  ?  How  will  it  be  in  the  far  future  when 
mayhap  the  Gaul  shall  insultingly  leap  upon  the  ruins 
of  the  Capitol  and  "  wasteful  wars  shall  statues  over 
turn"  ?  Whether  it  shall  then  endure  or  be  derided  and 
trampled  under  foot  will  depend  not  so  much  upon  the 
virility  of  its  powers,  as  upon  the  integrity  and  sense  of 
justice  of  the  American  people.  No  constitution  can 
save  a  nation  from  itself.  To  that  riddle  of  the  future 
the  wise  and  venerable  Franklin  in  almost  the  last 
words  spoken  to  the  convention,  after  the  engrossed 
copy  had  been  read,  gave  perhaps  the  most  illuminating 
answer  that  can  be  made.  It  can,  he  said,  speaking  of 
the  Constitution, "  only  end  in  despotism,  as  other  forms 
have  done  before  it,  when  the  people  shall  become  so 
corrupted  as  to  need  despotic  government  —  being  in 
capable  of  any  other." 

The   relation    between    the  Federal  Govern 
ment  and  the  States  was  involved  in  the  proposal 
96 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

to  amend  the  Constitution  by  giving  to  Congress 
the  power  to  levy  an  income  tax.  The  amend 
ment,  which  was  proposed  to  the  States  by  Con 
gress  on  July  12,  1909,  was  passed  by  that  body 
in  great  haste  and  with  slight  consideration  of 
its  form.  Mr.  McCall  approved  of  the  income 
tax  as  a  means  of  raising  revenue  but  thought 
that  the  power  to  levy  it,  except  in  great  national 
emergencies,  should  be  reserved  to  the  States. 
He  also  advocated  that  the  proposed  amendment 
be  so  changed  as  to  give  to  the  House  of  Repre 
sentatives  the  sole  right  to  originate  a  bill  levy 
ing  an  income  tax  and  as  to  require  the  Senate 
to  accept  or  reject  the  bill  in  the  exact  form  in 
which  it  came  from  the  House.  He  added:  — 

It  is  said  that  this  tax  is  for  use  in  time  of  war.  .  .  . 
Why  not,  then,  limit  it  expressly  to  time  of  war?  Why 
not,  for  the  just  protection  and  the  equal  rights  of  the 
people  of  New  York  and  of  the  other  great  States  of 
this  Union,  five  of  which  probably  will  pay  nine  tenths 
of  an  income  tax,  although  they  will  have  only  one 
ninth  of  the  representation  in  the  Senate  —  why  not 
preserve  the  limitation  upon  the  power  of  the  Central 
Government  ?  Why  drag  every  governmental  power  to 
Washington  so  that  a  vast  centralized  government  may 
devour  the  States  and  the  liberty  of  the  individual  as 
well  ?  I  say  this  amendment  should  be  more  carefully 
considered  than  it  has  yet  been  considered. 

It  is  liable  to  go  into  the  Constitution  of  the  United 

97 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

States  and  be  forever  a  part  of  the  organic  law  in  the 
form  in  which  it  has  been,  I  may  almost  say,  extem 
porized  or  improvised.  The  character  of  the  argument 
which  has  been  made,  that  this  tax  is  for  use  in  time  of 
war,  leads  me  to  observe  that  the  chief  purpose  of  the 
tax  is  not  financial,  but  social.  It  is  not  primarily  to 
raise  money  for  the  State,  but  to  regulate  the  citizen 
and  to  regenerate  the  moral  nature  of  man.  The  indi 
vidual  citizen  will  be  called  on  to  lay  bare  the  inner 
most  recesses  of  his  soul  in  affidavits,  and  with  the  aid 
of  the  Federal  inspector,  who  will  supervise  his  books 
and  papers  and  business  secrets,  he  may  be  made  to  be 
good,  according  to  the  notions  of  virtue  at  the  moment 
prevailing  in  Washington.  And,  incidentally,  and  since 
access  to  every  business  secret  in  the  country  can  be  had 
by  the  authorities  at  Washington,  the  citizen  may  be 
made  to  see  his  political  duty  if  you  happened  to  have 
a  President  who  confused  the  attainment  of  his  ambition 
with  the  highest  good  of  the  universe  and  was  willing 
to  abuse  his  power  in  order  to  coerce  the  citizen.  You 
are  creating  here  an  ideal  condition  for  corruption  and  for 
the  political  Jack  Cade  of  the  future  to  levy  blackmail. 
And  so,  Mr.  Speaker,  believing  that  this  amendment, 
with  no  compensation  whatever,  does  away  with  an 
important  part  of  the  great  compromise  of  the  Consti 
tution,  and  that  it  is  not  limited  to  the  emergency  for 
which  it  is  said  to  be  intended,  I  shall  vote  against  it. 
The  amendment  has  not  carefully  been  considered  by 
a  committee  of  this  House  or  by  anybody  else  in  the 
United  States  that  I  know  of,  unless  possibly  by  Mr. 
William  J.  Bryan.  [Applause.] 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

The  income  tax  amendment  became  part  of 
the  Constitution  on  February  25,  1913.  How 
little  reference  it  had  to  the  war  necessities  of  the 
Government  may  be  seen  from  the  fact  that  a  bill 
levying  an  income  tax  was  introduced  into  the 
House  six  weeks  later,  and  became  a  law  Octo 
ber  3,  1913. 

While  thus  maintaining  the  rights  of  the  States 
against  encroachment,  Mr.  McCall  was  equally 
strenuous  in  asserting  the  supremacy  of  the  Fed 
eral  Government  within  the  sphere  allotted  to  it. 
When  the  amendment  providing  for  the  popular 
election  of  United  States  Senators  was  before 
Congress,  strong  efforts  were  made  to  deprive  the 
Senate  of  all  authority  over  the  election  of  its 
members.  Had  this  movement  succeeded,  we 
should  have  had  the  strange  situation  that  if  a 
State  sent  to  the  Senate  a  man  who  had  been 
chosen  by  the  most  corrupt  methods,  or  even  one 
who  did  not  possess  the  constitutional  qualifica 
tions  for  membership  in  the  Senate,  there  would 
have  been  no  instrumentality  of  the  Federal 
Government  to  exclude  him.  There  would  have 
been  the  further  anomaly  that  while  the  House 
of  Representatives  would  still  have  been  the  sole 
judge  of  the  election  and  qualifications  of  its  mem 
bers,  the  election  of  Senators  would  have  been 
entirely  under  the  control  of  the  States.  Mr. 

99 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

McCall  was  in  favor  of  the  popular  election  of 
Senators.  The  state  legislatures  were  not  chosen 
primarily  for  the  purpose  of  electing  Senators, 
and  the  influences  to  which  they  were  often 
subjected  did  not  conduce  to  good  government. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  Mr.  McCall  was  so 
much  opposed  to  the  proposition  that  the  Fed 
eral  Government  should  have  no  control  over  the 
choice  of  this  important  class  of  Federal  officers 
that  he  declared  that  he  would  vote  against  the  en 
tire  amendment  unless  that  feature  was  removed. 
Ultimately  this  strange  attempt  to  cripple  the 
Federal  Government  was  defeated. 

Another  constitutional  controversy,  on  which 
Mr.  McCall  has  spoken  and  written  much,  con 
cerns  the  relations  between  the  House  and  the 
Senate.  The  latter,  as  the  smaller  and  more  per 
manent  body  of  the  two,  and  endowed  also  with 
extensive  executive  powers,  has  tended  for  many 
years  to  magnify  its  place  in  the  Government,  and 
in  so  doing  has  encroached  upon  the  constitutional 
prerogative  of  the  House  to  originate  revenue 
bills.  The  power  of  the  purse,  which  in  England 
is  vested  in  the  House  of  Commons,  was  in 
tended  by  the  framers  of  the  Constitution  to  be 
vested  in  the  House  of  Representatives.  At  first 
the  House  took  the  position  that  the  power  of 
the  Senate  over  money  bills  was  confined  to  sim- 
100 


CONSTITUTIONAL 


pie  acceptance  or  rejection.  But  the  Senate  argued 
that  the  exclusive  power  of  the  House  was  con 
fined  to  bills  for  raising  revenue,  and  that  the 
Senate  not  only  could  amend  such  bills  to  any 
extent,  but  could  even  originate  bills  for  the  re 
peal  of  taxes  or  reduction  of  revenue.  The  con 
troversy  has  never  been  settled.  The  House 
has  always  refused  to  pass  bills  for  the  reduction 
of  revenue  which  originated  in  the  Senate,  but  it 
has  not  been  consistent  in  its  attitude  toward  its 
revenue  measures,  some  of  which  have  been  radi 
cally  amended  in  the  Senate.  In  1872  the  House 
sent  to  the  Senate  a  bill  relating  to  a  tax  on  coffee 
and  the  Senate  amended  it  by  substituting  a  com 
plete  revision  of  the  tariff.  This  called  forth  a  pro 
test  from  the  House,  and  in  the  course  of  the  de 
bate  in  that  body  Garfield  said  that  the  action  of 
the  Senate  violated  "  a  right  which  cannot  be  sur 
rendered  without  inflicting  a  fatal  wound  upon  the 
integrity  of  our  whole  system  of  government." 
Nevertheless,  the  Senate  persisted  in  its  practice. 
The  Mills  Bill,  framed  by  the  House  on  free- 
trade  lines,  was  converted  by  a  Republican  Sen 
ate  into  a  high  protective  tariff.  The  Wilson  Bill 
was  so  radically  changed  by  the  Senate  that  Presi 
dent  Cleveland  refused  to  sign  it.  The  Payne 
Bill  was  returned  to  the  House  with  more  than 
six  hundred  amendments.  This  long-continued 

101 


W.  McCALL 

practice  has  made  the  prerogative  of  the  House 
little  more  than  a  shadow.  Both  on  the  floor  of 
the  House  and  in  print  Mr.  McCall  has  urged 
the  necessity  of  observing  the  spirit  of  the  Con 
stitution.  On  February  n,  1901,  he  said  in  the 
House  in  reference  to  a  revenue  bill:  — 

I  believe  that  the  Senate's  action  is  contrary  to  the 
spirit  of  the  Constitution.  A  reading  of  the  debates  at 
the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution,  a  reading 
of  the  contemporaneous  construction  of  that  instrument 
in  the  "  Federalist,"  the  whole  history  of  the  struggle 
in  Great  Britain  over  the  exercise  of  the  power  of 
taxation,  it  seems  to  me,  can  leave  no  doubt  that  the 
Senate,  in  the  case  of  the  bill  it  has  returned  here,  is 
practically  usurping  power.  It  is  not  a  mere  technical 
question,  as  put  by  the  gentleman  from  Texas.  It  is  a 
question  of  political  power,  the  distribution  of  political 
power  between  the  two  Houses  of  Congress.  It  is  a 
question  on  which  it  is  the  duty  of  the  House  to  assert 
its  prerogative  and  to  contend  for  a  fair  and  broad  con 
struction,  rather  than  a  technical  construction  which 
will  leave  it  with  the  mere  shadow  of  power.  .  .  .  The 
framers  of  the  Constitution  vested  a  great  power  in  the 
smaller  States  in  the  Senate,  and  to  offset  that  power  a 
compensation  was  provided  by  conferring  a  special  power 
over  taxation  upon  the  House.  .  .  .  The  framers  of 
the  Constitution,  as  shown  by  the  debates  on  the  Con 
stitution,  intended  to  leave  the  House  in  substantially 
the  same  position  as  the  House  of  Commons.  Taxes 
were  declared  to  be  the  voluntary  grant  of  the  House 
102 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

of  Commons  which  represented  the  people  of  England. 
The  States  do  not  pay  the  national  taxes ;  the  taxes  are 
paid  by  the  people.  One  sixth  of  the  people  of  this 
country  elect  a  majority  of  the  whole  Senate.  The  State 
of  New  York  has  as  many  people  as  the  combined  pop 
ulation  of  States  electing  thirty-six  Senators.  The  fram- 
ers  of  the  Constitution  provided  that  while  certain  powers 
of  government,  such  as  might  be  exercised  by  a  council 
of  a  State,  should  be  transacted  by  the  Senate,  the  power 
over  the  purse  should  be  held  by  the  House,  which 
represented  the  people.  On  the  theory  of  the  Senate's 
action  the  great  power  of  the  House  to  originate  reve 
nue  bills  dwindles  to  the  power  only  of  originating  an 
enacting  clause.  The  House  cannot  with  any  dignity 
and  with  a  due  regard  to  its  own  prerogative  ask  the 
Senate  for  a  committee  of  conference.  [Applause.] 

Mr.  McCall  has  also  protested  against  the 
Senate's  use  of  the  treaty-making  power  to  usurp 
the  prerogative  of  the  House  to  originate  revenue 
bills.  In  an  article  in  the  "Atlantic  Monthly" 
for  October,  1903,  he  said:  — 

The  expansion  of  the  power  of  the  Senate  in  an  un 
democratic  as  well  as  in  an  unconstitutional  direction 
is  also  seen  in  the  growing  tendency  to  pass  laws,  and 
especially  taxation  laws,  by  treaty.  Treaties  are  high 
contracts  between  nations,  and  it  can  hardly  be  believed 
that  it  was  within  the  contemplation  of  the  framers  of 
the  Constitution  so  elaborately  to  construct  a  legislative 
machine  and  at  the  same  time  to  throw  the  whole  mech 
anism  out  of  gear  by  a  single  clause  regarding  treaties, 

103 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

providing  that  the  President  and  Senate  might  call  in  a 
foreign  potentate  and  make  laws  for  the  National  Gov 
ernment  of  the  United  States.  Treaties  have  the  force 
of  law,  but  they  should  obviously  be  within  the  fair 
scope  of  the  treaty-making  power.  At  any  rate,  it  would 
scarcely  be  reasonable  to  claim  that  they  set  aside  the 
Constitution,  and  if  we  are  to  regard  the  Senate  as  a 
part  of  two  legislative  machines,  it  cannot,  as  a  part  of 
either,  do  the  things  prohibited  by  the  Constitution. 
Under  that  instrument  revenue  bills  must  originate  in 
the  House.  How,  then,  can  they  originate  by  treaty? 
It  would,  indeed,  be  a  curious  spectacle,  that  of  the 
Senate,  composed  in  the  way  it  is,  sitting  behind  closed 
doors,  and  deciding  in  secret  what  taxes  the  American 
people  are  to  pay. 

Another  phase  of  the  relations  between  the  Sen 
ate  and  the  House  of  Representatives  is  involved 
in  the  respective  authority  of  the  two  bodies  in 
the  making  and  abrogation  of  treaties.  The  Con 
stitution  declares  that  a  treaty  which  has  received 
the  sanction  of  the  President  and  two  thirds  of 
the  Senate  is  a  part  of  the  supreme  law  of  the 
land  and  all  persons  are  bound  thereby.  This  is 
clear  and  explicit,  but  if  the  United  States  desires 
to  rid  itself  of  a  treaty  into  which  it  has  entered, 
some  difficult  questions  arise.  May  the  agents 
of  the  United  States  who  made  the  treaty  —  that 
is,  the  President  and  the  Senate  —  also  abrogate 
it,  or  must  both  branches  of  the  legislature  join 
104 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

in  altering  the  supreme  law  of  the  land?  This 
matter  was  fully  discussed  in  Congress  in  1911 
in  connection  with  the  abrogation  of  the  treaty 
with  Russia.  Mr.  McCall,  in  a  speech  on  De 
cember  20,  1911,  argued  that  treaties  should 
only  be  abrogated  by  a  joint  resolution  of  the 
two  Houses  of  Congress.  In  support  of  this 
view  he  said  :  — 

I  do  not  concur  at  all  in  the  view  that  has  been  ad 
vanced  in  another  body,  that  the  power  to  break  trea 
ties  resides  in  the  Executive,  by  and  with  the  advice 
and  consent  of  the  Senate.  The  Constitution  expressly 
confers  upon  the  President  the  power  to  make  treaties, 
with  the  concurrence  of  two  thirds  of  the  Senators  pres 
ent.  Now,  we  all  know  what  the  making  of  a  treaty  is. 
Jay  has  said  that  a  treaty  is  a  trade  between  two  na 
tions.  It  requires  two  or  more  parties  to  make  a  trade  ; 
but  treaty-breaking  is  a  radically  different  thing.  That 
can  be  done  by  one  party.  It  is  sometimes  a  perilous 
thing  to  do.  It  may  sometimes  lead  to  war.  It  may  lead 
to  the  destruction  of  the  vested  rights  of  millions  of 
people,  and  it  seems  to  me  that  it  is  a  very  extraordi 
nary  construction  to  put  upon  the  Constitution  to  hold 
that  the  term  "  making  treaties"  is  so  pregnant  as  to 
include  its  opposite. 

I  have  no  doubt  that  the  Senate  can  very  wisely  ex 
ercise  this  power.  It  is  a  great  thing  for  the  country  to 
have  a  body  of  wise  and  virtuous  men  who  are  con 
scious  of  their  qualities  and  are  willing  in  a  patriotic  way 
to  exercise  not  merely  their  own  constitutional  powers, 

105 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

but  whatever  other  powers  may  be  scattered  about 
under  our  system  of  government  and  which,  not  being 
nailed  down,  can  be  made  to  move  in  their  direction. 
[Applause.] 

Treaties  have  usually  been  abrogated  by  both  Houses 
of  Congress.  There  are  a  very  few  exceptions.  There 
is  the  exception  of  the  action  of  Mr.  Lincoln,  taken 
during  war-time,  and  yet  it  was  thought  best  in  that 
case  to  have  his  action  subsequently  affirmed  by  a  vote 
of  the  two  Houses  of  Congress.  [Applause.] 

When  the  Fifty-sixth  Congress  assembled  in 
December,  1899,  it  was  found  that  on  the  face 
of  the  returns  Brigham  H.  Roberts  had  been 
elected  to  the  House  of  Representatives  from  the 
State  of  Utah.  It  was  not  questioned  that  he 
possessed  the  requisite  constitutional  qualifica 
tions  and  that  he  had  received  a  majority  of  the 
votes  cast.  But  it  was  alleged  that  he  was  a  po- 
lygamist,  and  in  consequence  of  a  fit  of  moral 
hysteria,  such  as  sometimes  seizes  Congress, 
a  resolution  was  introduced  declaring  that  he 
"ought  not  to  have  or  hold  a  seat  in  the  House 
of  Representatives  and  that  the  seat  to  which  he 
was  elected  is  hereby  declared  vacant."  This  res 
olution  presented  an  important  question  of  con 
stitutional  right  and  power.  The  Constitution 
provides  that  either  branch  of  Congress  may,  by 
a  two-thirds  vote,  expel  one  of  its  members.  It 
also  provides  that  each  House  shall  be  the  judge 
106 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

of  the  election,  return,  and  qualifications  of  its 
own  members.  By  virtue  of  this  clause,  the  spon 
sors  of  the  resolution  for  the  exclusion  of  Rob 
erts  claimed  the  right  to  declare  his  seat  vacant. 
Mr.  McCall  took  the  opposite  view.  He  argued 
that  if  the  House  assumed  the  right  to  exclude 
a  legally-elected  member  for  any  reason  not  spec 
ified  in  the  Constitution,  it  thereby  to  that  extent 
added  to  the  constitutional  qualifications  for  elec 
tion  to  the  House.  Furthermore,  if  the  House 
could  exclude  any  man  because  it  did  not  ap 
prove  of  his  personal  habits,  it  could  exclude 
him  for  any  other  reason  that  might  seem  good 
to  it.  The  Constitution  itself  clearly  distinguished 
between  the  power  to  exclude  and  the  power  to 
expel.  The  former  requires  only  a  majority  vote, 
while  the  latter,  which  is  evidently  regarded  as  a 
more  serious  matter,  requires  a  two-thirds  vote. 
Since  the  committee  appointed  to  investigate  the 
Roberts  case  had  found  that  he  possessed  the  con 
stitutional  qualifications  for  membership  in  the 
House  and  that  he  had  been  duly  elected,  Mr. 
McCall  argued  that  he  was  entitled  to  take  his 
seat.  Having  been  admitted  to  the  House,  that 
body  could  then,  if  it  saw  fit,  expel  him.  And 
Mr.  McCall  added  that  in  his  judgment  the  prac 
tice  of  polygamy  was  sufficient  cause  for  expul 
sion.  Mr.  McCall's  argument  is  undoubtedly  a 

107 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

sound  exposition  of  the  clauses  of  the  Constitu 
tion  to  which  it  relates,  but  the  House,  in  acting 
upon  the  resolution,  furnished  another  illustra 
tion  of  the  fact  that  in  disposing  of  election  cases 
it  pays  little  heed  to  either  law  or  evidence.  The 
resolution  was  adopted  by  a  vote  of  268  to  50. 
When  a  similar  case  arose  shortly  afterward  in 
the  Senate,  that  body  by  a  decisive  vote  adopted 
the  course  advocated  by  Mr.  McCall. 

In  recent  years  considerable  dissatisfaction  has 
been  manifested  with  reference  to  the  working 
of  our  political  institutions.  It  has  been  felt  that 
representatives  did  not  reflect  the  sentiments  of 
their  constituents,  and  that  partisan  machinery 
was  used  to  defeat  the  popular  will.  Senator 
Root's  statement  that  the  government  of  New 
York  had  been  no  more  responsive  to  public 
sentiment  during  the  past  forty  years  than  had 
the  government  of  Venezuela  was  expert  testi 
mony  in  support  of  a  widespread  conviction. 
While  there  was  little  question  as  to  the  exist 
ence  of  the  condition,  there  was  difference  of 
opinion  as  to  the  cause  and  the  remedy.  There 
can  be  no  doubt  that  one  of  the  most  potent  rea 
sons  for  the  failure  of  our  institutions  to  achieve 
the  results  desired  is  the  excessive  burden  which 
their  operation  imposes  upon  the  voter.  No 
other  electorate  in  the  world  is  called  upon  to 
108 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

take  so  large  a  share  in  government  as  is  that 
of  the  United  States.  Our  elections  are  so  fre 
quent,  the  number  of  officers  to  be  chosen  is  so 
large,  and  the  questions  of  policy  to  be  consid 
ered  are  so  numerous,  that  the  voter  cannot 
properly  discharge  the  task  which  is  imposed 
upon  him.  Most  members  of  the  electorate  are 
obliged  to  earn  their  living.  Their  time  and  at 
tention  must  be  given  to  their  private  affairs.  If 
in  addition  they  are  obliged  to  pass  upon  numer 
ous  and  complicated  questions  of  public  policy, 
the  latter  are  certain  to  suffer.  It  is  absurd  to 
submit  measures  to  the  decision  of  electors  who 
have  neither  time  nor  opportunity  to  inform 
themselves  concerning  them,  and  it  is  obvious 
that  comparatively  few  legislative  questions  arouse 
any  general  public  interest  or  can  be  sufficiently 
freed  from  details  to  make  them  suitable  for  sub 
mission  to  a  popular  vote. 

The  remedies  for  admitted  evils  which  have 
been  most  ardently  advocated  have  been  the  in 
itiative,  the  referendum,  and  the  recall.  These 
have  been  heralded  by  their  sponsors  as  though 
they  were  the  latest  discoveries  in  the  art  of  gov 
ernment,  whereas  they  are  as  old  as  organized 
society  and  are  the  devices  under  which  the  highly 
cultivated  democracies  of  the  ancient  world  went 
to  ruin.  It  is  somewhat  strange  that  so  practical 

109 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

a  people  as  the  Americans  give  so  little  heed  to 
the  experience  of  other  countries  in  matters  gov 
ernmental,  and  so  often  assume  that  the  laws  of 
economics  and  of  politics  which  operate  in  the 
rest  of  the  world  are  suspended  within  our  bor 
ders.  It  is  well,  therefore,  that  some  of  our  States 
have  adopted  the  machinery  of  direct  govern 
ment  which  has  proved  so  unsuccessful  else 
where,  in  order  that  we  may  have  an  ocular  dem 
onstration  of  its  working.  The  State  of  Oregon, 
which  has  gone  further  in  this  direction  than  any 
other  State  in  the  Union,  is  rendering  an  impor 
tant  service  in  acting  as  a  sort  of  political  testing 
laboratory  for  the  whole  country.  It  may  not  be 
out  of  place  to  refer  here  to  an  instructive  illus 
tration  of  the  working  of  the  referendum  in  a 
town  in  that  State  which  desired  to  issue  bonds 
under  conditions  which  necessitated  a  popular 
vote  on  the  question.  In  accordance  with  the 
provisions  of  the  law  of  Oregon,  a  pamphlet  set 
ting  forth  the  reasons  for  the  issue  was  printed 
and  a  copy  sent  to  each  voter.  In  the  pamphlet 
a  mistake  was  made  as  to  the  date  of  maturity 
of  one  series  of  the  bonds,  and  the  attorney  for 
a  prospective  purchaser  raised  the  question  as 
to  whether  this  mistake  might  not  affect  their 
validity.  Whereupon  the  officers  of  the  town 
offered  to  prove  that  only  one  voter  had  read 
no 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

the  pamphlet  and  that  he  had  not  noticed  the 
error. 

On  several  occasions,  but  especially  in  an  ad 
dress  before  the  Ohio  State  Bar  Association  in 
1911,  Mr.  McCall  has  indicated  the  objections  to 
the  initiative,  referendum,  and  recall  as  methods 
of  government  in  the  United  States.  Such  suc 
cess  as  these  methods  have  ever  had  has  been  in 
small,  homogeneous  communities.  He  has  many 
times  protested  against  our  tendency  to  multiply 
laws  —  a  tendency  which  the  initiative  would  only 
confirm.  The  facility  with  which  signatures  for 
the  submission  of  a  new  law  could  be  obtained 
was  well  illustrated  by  Mr.  Roosevelt,  who  re 
plied  to  an  applicant  for  appointment  as  post 
master  who  said  that  his  application  was  sup 
ported  by  a  petition  from  his  fellow  townsmen, 
"I  could  get  a  petition  to  have  you  hanged." 

The  referendum  is  less  objectionable  than  the 
initiative,  but  in  addition  to  the  fact  that  the  elec 
torate  is  seldom  sufficiently  informed  as  to  the 
details  of  legislative  projects  to  make  an  intel 
ligent  decision  on  them,  this  method  of  procedure 
has  an  unfavorable  effect  on  legislative  bodies. 
As  to  this  Mr.  McCall  said  :  — 

The  referendum  takes  away  from  the  legislature  the 
responsibility  for  the  final  passage  of  the  laws,  and  per 
mits  it  to  shift  the  burden  upon  the  people.  Legislators 

in 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

will  be  asked  :  "  Are  you  not  willing  to  trust  the  people 
to  say  in  their  wisdom  whether  a  given  bill  should  he 
enacted  ? "  The  prevailing  vice  of  members  of  lawmak- 
ing  bodies  in  our  country  is  not  venality,  it  is  political 
cowardice ;  and  they  will  be  ready  to  take  refuge  in  that 
invitation  to  trust  the  people.  A  witty  member  of  Con 
gress  from  Mississippi  once  said  that  he  usually  found 
it  easier  to  do  wrong  than  to  explain  why  he  did  right. 
There  will  be  no  such  difficulty  under  the  referendum. 
The  legislator  may  dodge  the  responsibility  of  voting 
upon  some  bad  but  specious  law  where  his  political  in 
terest  would  lead  him  to  vote  one  way  and  his  sense  of 
duty  another  way.  He  would  only  need  to  say  that  he 
believed  in  the  people,  and  would  vote  to  refer  it  to 
that  supreme  court  of  appeal. 

One  of  the  most  pernicious  measures  ever  rec 
ommended  as  a  method  of  popular  government 
is  the  recall  of  judicial  decisions.  If  the  liberty  of 
the  individual  is  to  be  preserved,  the  judiciary 
must  be  independent.  If  the  courts  are  deprived 
of  their  freedom,  whether  by  the  decree  of  a 
monarch  after  the  manner  of  James  II  or  by  the 
vote  of  the  people,  men's  rights  are  without  any 
sure  guaranty.  Judges,  to  be  sure,  are  fallible,  but 
experience  has  shown  that  of  all  the  means  of 
protecting  human  freedom,  an  independent  judi 
ciary  is  the  best.  If  a  judicial  decision  were 
submitted  to  a  popular  vote,  the  result  would 
inevitably  be  determined  in  large  measure  by  the 

112 


CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS 

popularity  or  unpopularity  of  the  litigants,  and 
yet  the  most  unpopular  man  or  corporation  is 
entitled  to  the  equal  protection  of  the  laws. 
Those  who  have  advocated  that  a  judicial  decision 
should  be  subject  to  being  set  aside  by  a  popular 
vote  have  usually  based  their  argument  upon  cases 
in  which  an  attempted  exercise  of  the  police 
power  has  been  held  invalid  on  the  ground  that  it 
was  not  due  process  of  law.  Justice  Holmes  once 
said  of  the  police  power,  "  It  may  be  put  forth  in 
aid  of  what  is  sanctioned  by  usage,  or  held  by  the 
prevailing  morality  or  strong  and  preponderating 
opinion  to  be  greatly  and  immediately  necessary 
to  the  public  welfare."  There  could  be  no  safer 
rule  for  the  guidance  of  the  courts  than  this,  and 
the  history  of  the  American  judiciary  shows  that 
in  general  it  has  been  faithfully  followed.  But  the 
fact  that  a  particular  piece  of  legislation  has  been 
enacted  does  not  in  itself  prove  that  it  represents 
the  "  prevailing  morality  or  strong  and  prepon 
derating  opinion."  The  courts  may  judge  of  that 
with  as  much  hope  of  reaching  a  correct  result 
as  may  the  legislature,  and  if  they  make  a  mistake 
experience  has  shown  that  they  will  correct  it 
without  a  resort  to  a  popular  vote.  In  1907,  for 
instance,  the  Court  of  Appeals  of  New  York  held, 
in  People  v.  Williams  (189  N.Y.  131),  that  a 
statute  regulating  women's  hours  of  work  violated 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

their  freedom  of  contract.  Only  eight  years  later, 
in  People  v.  Schweinler  Press  (214  N.Y.  395), 
the  court  reversed  this  decision  in  accordance 
with  the  "  prevailing  morality  "  and  "  strong  and 
preponderating  opinion." 


CHAPTER   IV 

THE   POLICY   OF    PROTECTION 

THE  electoral  contest  of  1 892, which  was  the 
first  campaign  in  which  Mr.  McCall  was  a 
candidate  for  Congress,  turned  chiefly  upon  the 
tariff.  From  the  beginning  of  its  history  the  Re 
publican  Party  had  been  committed  to  the  policy 
of  so  shaping  the  tariff  upon  imports  as  to  en 
courage  the  establishment  of  new  industries  for 
which  the  country  was  adapted  and  to  protect 
existing  industries  against  foreign  competition 
which  could  be  met  only  by  reducing  wages  be 
low  what  was  regarded  as  the  proper  American 
standard.  The  financial  needs  of  the  Government 
during  the  Civil  War  and  the  years  immediately 
following  were  so  great  that  there  was  little  dis 
cussion  as  to  the  rate  of  duties  which  should  be 
imposed,  but  the  Democratic  platform  of  1868 
declared  for  "  a  tariff  for  revenue  upon  foreign 
imports,"  and  the  two  parties  have  continued  to 
divide  upon  that  issue,  although  in  one  or  two 
campaigns,  particularly  those  of  1896  and  1912, 
the  tariff  has  been  overshadowed  by  other  ques 
tions.  The  Democratic  platform  has  often  been 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

so  cryptic  in  its  utterances  upon  the  tariff  that 
both  a  high  protectionist  like  Samuel  J.  Randall 
and  a  free-trader  like  John  G.  Carlisle  could  sup 
port  it.  In  1 892,  however,  it  was  faultlessly  clear. 
It  denounced  Republican  protection  as  a  fraud  by 
which  a  great  majority  of  the  people  were  robbed 
for  the  benefit  of  a  few,  and  declared  it  to  be  "  a 
fundamental  principle  of  the  Democratic  Party 
that  the  Federal  Government  has  no  constitu 
tional  power  to  impose  and  collect  tariff  duties, 
except  for  the  purposes  of  revenue  only."  A 
President  and  a  Congress  elected  on  such  a  plat 
form  could  have  no  choice  but  to  undertake  a 
revision  of  the  tariff  in  accordance  with  the  prin 
ciple  of  a  tariff  for  revenue  only. 

The  campaign  of  1892  was  one  of  the  most 
listless  that  this  country  has  ever  known.  Neither 
party  displayed  much  enthusiasm  either  for  its 
nominee  or  its  platform.  The  situation  was  well 
expressed  by  Colonel  Ingersoll  when  he  said, 
"  Each  party  would  like  to  find  some  way  to  beat 
the  candidate  of  the  other  without  electing  its 
own."  The  Democrats  had  for  a  third  time 
nominated  Grover  Cleveland,  who  promptly  re 
pudiated  one  of  the  most  important  planks  in  the 
party  platform.  The  Republicans,  in  a  perfunc 
tory  spirit,  had  renominated  President  Harrison. 
He  was  a  man  of  unblemished  character  and  high 
116 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION 

ability,  but  he  rivaled  Whistler  in  his  mastery  of 
the  art  of  making  enemies,  while  his  coldness  of 
manner  and  lack  of  tact  alienated  even  his  friends. 
The  most  marked  feature  of  the  election  was  the 
sudden  rise  of  the  People's  Party,  which  advo 
cated  many  of  the  economic  doctrines  adopted 
by  the  Democrats  four  years  later,  and  which 
polled  over  a  million  votes.  The  Democrats  won 
an  overwhelming  victory,  and  for  the  first  time 
since  1861  found  themselves  in  control  not  only 
of  the  Presidency  but  of  both  branches  of  Con 
gress. 

The  clear-cut  pronouncement  in  the  Demo 
cratic  platform  in  favor  of  a  tariff  for  revenue,  as 
well  as  President  Cleveland's  well-known  views 
on  the  subject,  made  it  inevitable  that  the  new 
Congress,  in  which  Mr.  McCall  took  his  seat  for 
the  first  time,  should  undertake  a  revision  of  the 
existing  duties.  Accordingly,  when  Congress  met 
in  regular  session  in  December,  1893,  tne  Com 
mittee  on  Ways  and  Means,  under  the  lead 
ership  of  William  L.  Wilson,  of  West  Virginia, 
brought  in  a  tariffbill.  The  proposed  law  lowered 
the  duties  on  a  comparatively  small  number  of 
articles,  and  was  in  general  a  very  moderate  meas 
ure  of  tariff  reform.  Moderate,  however,  as  it 
was,  the  Democrats  in  the  Senate  refused  to 
accept  it,  and  returned  it  to  the  House  with 

117 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

amendments  so  numerous  and  so  radical  as  to 
make  it  a  materially  different  measure.  In  its 
amended  form  it  was  so  far  from  fulfilling  the 
pledges  of  the  Democratic  platform  that  Presi 
dent  Cleveland  wrote  an  indignant  letter  in  which 
he  characterized  the  action  of  the  Democratic 
Senators  as  "party  perfidy  and  party  dishonor," 
and  when  the  bill  was  accepted  by  the  House  and 
submitted  to  him  for  his  approval,  he  held  it  for 
ten  days  and  allowed  it  to  become  a  law  without 
his  signature. 

While  the  Wilson  bill  was  pending  in  the 
House,  Mr.  McCall  delivered  an  important 
speech  in  which  he  urged  that  the  tariff  policy  of 
the  country  should  be  determined  by  experience 
rather  than  by  abstract  theory.  As  his  first  utter 
ance  in  Congress  on  a  subject  with  which  he  was 
closely  identified  for  twenty  years,  as  well  as 
for  the  reasoning  involved,  it  possesses  peculiar 
interest. 

I  have  been  somewhat  struck  by  the  significant  trib 
ute  that  has  been  paid  by  the  leading  advocates  of  this 
bill  to  the  strength  of  the  practical  evidence  in  favor 
of  protection.  They  evidently  prefer  to  soar  among  the 
clouds  in  the  realm  of  pure  abstraction  and  to  commune 
with  the  kindred  spirits  of  departed  free-traders,  rather 
than  to  cast  even  an  occasional  glance  at  the  essential 
history  of  their  country.  I  do  not  mean  to  assert,  be- 
118 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION 

cause  it  would  not  be  true,  that  the  supporters  of  this 
bill  have  not  alluded  to  American  affairs.  They  tell 
us  that  employers  are  selfish.  That,  unfortunately,  is  a 
charge  that  can  be  truthfully  made  against  any  portion 
of  mankind.  They  tell  us  that  we  have  labor  troubles 
and  strikes  in  America,  but  they  fail  to  tell  us  also  that 
nowhere  in  the  world  are  strikes  more  prevalent  than  in 
free-trade  England.  But  the  great  central  fact  of  our 
national  prosperity  they  discreetly  ignore,  and  I  submit 
that  that  fact  is  not  to  be  obscured  or  answered  by  mere 
noise  or  by  theory,  or  by  bellowing  about  Carnegie. 
Adam  Smith's  theories  have  been  tested  in  this  country 
on  a  gigantic  scale.  Why  not  look  at  the  result  of  the 
experiment  ? 

One  hundred  years  ago  this  was  essentially  an  agri 
cultural  nation,  and  there  has  been  no  day  from  that 
time  to  this  when  the  application  of  your  theory,  that 
we  should  consult  the  immediate  needs  of  the  consumer, 
that  we  should  give  our  attention  to  those  things  that 
would  at  once  and  most  easily  turn  a  penny,  would  not 
have  directed  our  growth  in  the  direction  of  a  purely 
agricultural  development. 

As  England  and  other  countries  supplying  us  with 
manufactured  goods  might  have  needed  more  bread,  we 
should  have  reclaimed  more  land,  until  to-day  we  should 
be  mere  producers  of  raw  materials  in  competition  with 
Australia  and  the  South  American  Republics.  With 
land  so  plenty  that  each  man  could  have  his  own  farm, 
at  any  given  time  the  laborer  would  earn  more  in  tilling 
his  own  soil  than  in  working  in  a  factory  in  competition 
with  similar  labor  abroad.  With  us,  land  was  plenty 

119 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

and  cheap ;  abroad,  it  was  comparatively  scarce  and 
dear.  The  free  play  of  the  theories  of  Adam  Smith, 
whose  laws  have  so  often  in  this  debate  been  confused 
with  the  ordinances  of  the  Almighty,  would  have  made 
us  essentially  an  agricultural  nation. 

It  was  the  happy  fortune  of  this  country  that  it  was 
guided  in  its  early  days  by  men  who  took  a  broader  view 
than  that  the  immediate  interest  of  consumption  was  the 
general  interest.  The  good  sense  of  Washington  and 
those  who  aided  him  in  laying  the  foundations  of  the 
Republic  shaped  for  the  young  nation  a  far  better  des 
tiny  and  started  it  under  brighter  auspices  on  the  high 
way  of  nations. 

Built  to  work  out  the  sound  aspirations  of  those 
immortal  statesmen,  and  not  an  impracticable  pedant's 
dream,  the  Republic  has  gone  on  to  conquer  and  civil 
ize  the  vast  areas  of  her  territory  and  to  become  great 
in  every  essential  that  goes  to  the  making  of  a  state. 
And  she  has  conquered  more.  Mighty  in  her  own 
growth,  her  achievements  in  invention  and  in  every 
liberal  pursuit  have  been  of  incalculable  benefit  to  the 
world  at  large,  and  she  has  developed  into  a  splendid 
agency  for  the  uplifting  of  mankind.  She  is  the  practical 
answer  to  your  theories,  and  also  to  your  miserable  as 
sumption,  made  to  masquerade  in  this  debate  as  broad 
philanthropy,  that  the  children  of  Adam  the  world  over 
are  poorer  because  of  her  prosperity.  .  .  . 

The  difficulty  is  that  the  theorist  measures  every 
thing  here  by  a  standard  of  price  that  exists  in  England 
or  some  other  foreign  country,  and  finds  the  domestic 
price  by  adding  to  the  foreign  price  the  cost  of  removing 

120 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION 

the  obstacles  necessary  to  land  a  given  article  in  our 
market.  It  is  immaterial,  so  far  as  the  theory  goes, 
whether  those  obstacles  are  natural  or  artificial  ones  set 
up  at  the  custom-house.  There  are  certain  industries 
to-day  in  this  country  which  are  protected  from  for 
eign  competition  by  obstacles  that  are  insuperable.  In 
these  cases  the  Chinese  wall  towers  to  the  skies.  The 
protection  is  equivalent  to  a  rate  of  duty  infinitely 
high.  What  conditions  prevail  in  such  industries?  For 
instance,  distance  with  regard  to  many  articles  of  com 
merce  has  by  the  invention  of  modern  times  been  prac 
tically  done  away  with.  But  it  is  not  yet  possible  to 
land  on  our  shores  European  newspapers  on  the  morn 
ing  of  their  publication.  If  what  is  accomplished  by  dis 
tance  were  accomplished  by  a  tariff,  we  should  hear  a 
great  deal  about  the  terrible  exactions  of  the  daily  news 
paper  trust,  the  tax  upon  light  and  intelligence  and  the 
monstrous  burdens  laid  upon  our  people.  But  since  this 
obstacle  has  not  been  produced  by  the  tariff,  it  has  not 
occurred  to  any  one  to  deny  that  our  daily  newspaper 
press,  though  far  from  perfection  in  many  respects  and 
partaking  of  our  national  faults,  gives  more  for  the 
money  than  any  other  newspaper  press  in  the  world.  .  .  . 
The  free-traders,  as  if  the  classification  settled  the 
whole  question,  divide  mankind  into  consumers  and 
producers.  Then  they  assume  on  this  artificial  line  that 
as  consumption  makes  production  necessary,  and  we 
never  consume  simply  because  we  have  produced,  we 
should  only  have  a  care  for  the  immediate  interest  of 
the  consumer.  They  do  not  consider  the  fact  that  in 
order  to  be  consumers  men  must  first  be  producers.  It  is 

121 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

necessary  for  man  to  consume,  and  it  is  first  necessary, 
therefore,  for  him  to  produce.  A  policy  which  would 
regard  him  simply  as  a  consumer  would  leave  out  half 
of  the  problem.  The  immediate  interest  of  the  consumer 
would  require  the  breaking  down  of  every  tariff  wall. 

Things  for  the  day  would  doubtless  be  cheaper,  but 
when  millions  of  men  thereby  cease  to  be  producers 
they  very  quickly  cease  to  be  consumers  and  starve. 

In  1899  Mr.  McCall  was  made  a  member  of 
the  Committee  on  Ways  and  Means,  and  he 
continued  to  serve  on  that  committee  until  his 
retirement  from  the  House  fourteen  years  later. 
At  the  time  of  his  first  appointment,  the  Dingley 
Act  of  1897  was  in  force.  That  measure  had 
been  framed  when  public  sentiment  was  in  a  state 
of  violent  reaction  against  the  Wilson-Gorman 
Act  of  1894.  The  duties  were  therefore  made 
unreasonably  high,  even  from  the  standpoint  of 
a  protectionist,  and  it  was  easy  to  see  that  the 
adoption  of  the  measure  would  be  followed  im 
mediately  by  agitation  for  its  revision.  When 
that  measure  was  before  the  House,  Mr.  McCall 
urged  that  the  schedules  be  made  more  moder 
ate  in  order  that  they  might  have  some  chance 
of  permanence.  In  the  debate  on  March  29, 
1897,  ne  said: — 

With  all  due  respect  to  the  Committee  on  Ways 
and  Means,   and  its  chairman,  whose  fine  capacity  I 
122 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION 

admire,  I  think  we  might  safely  moderate  some  of  the 
duties  of  this  schedule.  Our  manufacturers  and  busi 
ness  men  want  a  tariff  law  which  will  stand.  They  are 
weary  of  being  forever  upon  the  rack,  of  passing  through 
the  crucible  of  tariff  agitation  every  four  years,  and  of 
having  the  price  of  every  article  of  the  commerce  and 
trade  of  this  great  country  constantly  in  danger  of 
change  by  tariff  legislation.  What  they  long  for  is  in 
dustrial  peace  and  a  settled  and  permanent  order,  so 
that  they  can  mature  their  plans  for  years  in  the  future, 
instead  of  working  from  hand  to  mouth  and  skulking 
between  Presidential  elections.  We  should  be  careful 
not  to  put  in  any  of  the  schedules  of  our  law  an  invita 
tion  to  further  agitation,  or  place  there  the  germs  of  a 
new  reaction.  After  the  disastrous  experience  of  the  last 
four  years,  the  country  is  prepared  to  accept  a  broad 
and  rational  application  of  the  doctrine  of  protection ; 
but  the  course  of  moderation  is  the  course  of  safety. 

It  had  been  urged  by  the  friends  of  the  Ding- 
ley  bill  that  the  Republican  victory  in  1896  had 
been  so  overwhelming  and  the  Democratic  Party 
was  so  disrupted  that  no  opposition  to  the  Re 
publican  programme  need  be  feared.  Mr.  McCaJl 
did  not  share  this  view.  He  pointed  out  that 
while  a  million  Democrats  had  voted  for  Mc- 
Kinley,  six  and  a  half  millions  had  voted  for 
Bryan. 

Let  us,  then,  take  counsel  of  our  reason.  Let  us 
pass  a  law  with  a  moderate  but  sufficient  measure  of 

123 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

protection,  and  not  put  weapons  in  the  hands  of  our 
adversaries  and,  by  resorting  to  any  extremes,  alienate 
those  splendid  allies  who  came  to  us  from  the  Demo 
cratic  Party. 

It  was  in  this  speech  that  Mr.  McCall  first 
stated  his  conception  of  the  principles  which 
should  govern  the  formulation  of  a  protective 
tariff. 

The  argument  advanced  upon  this  floor  that  we 
should  make  protective  duties  not  merely  cover  the 
difference  in  cost  of  production  here  and  abroad,  but 
also  the  difference  in  rates  of  freight  from  foreign  ports 
and  from  our  inland  points  to  our  seaports,  is  one  the 
ingenuity  of  which  I  can  admire  much  more  than  its 
force.  The  people  of  our  Northern  Atlantic  seaboard 
do  not  have  direct  access  to  the  iron  ores  or  coal.  Their 
territory  is  poor  in  natural  resources.  In  that  respect 
they  are  at  a  great  disadvantage  with  the  States  of  Penn 
sylvania  and  Alabama  and  Tennessee.  But  they  have 
one  great  natural  advantage.  They  have  the  sea.  In 
my  humble  opinion  the  doctrine  of  protection  does  not 
require  this  to  be  taken  from  them  any  more  than  it 
requires  the  coal  mines  of  Pennsylvania  to  be  closed  in 
order  that  the  sea  may  be  more  profitable  to  those  upon 
its  shores.  Is  that  doctrine  to  be  carried  to  the  extent 
of  holding  that  duties  shall  be  levied  and  Pennsylvania 
and  Alabama  and  Tennessee  shall  be  protected,  not 
merely  to  the  extent  of  the  difference  in  the  cost  of 
production  in  those  States  and  abroad,  but  that  they 
shall  be  protected  against  the  beneficent  forces  of  na- 
124 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION 

ture  which  it  is  the  birthright  of  other  less-favored  por 
tions  of  their  own  land  to  enjoy  ?  This  freight  argu 
ment  requires  that  the  people  of  New  York  and  the 
New  England  States,  with  their  ships  swinging  idly  at 
their  wharves,  should  refuse  a  service  which  would  be 
performed  for  them  without  cost  by  the  free  winds  of 
heaven,  in  order  to  support  long  lines  of  railroads,  and 
that  in  the  carrying  of  heavy  freights  over  rivers  and 
mountains  and  hundreds  and  perhaps  thousands  of  miles 
of  territory  there  should  be  uselessly  consumed  the  coal 
which  a  kind  Providence  had  stored  up  for  the  use  of 
future  generations.  This  argument  is  largely  based  on 
the  theory  that  the  people  were  made  for  the  railroads 
and  not  the  railroads  for  the  people.  There  is  no  place 
in  the  economy  of  this  nation,  or  of  the  race,  for  such 
wanton  waste  as  this.  It  would  be  as  rational  for  you 
to  bar  out  the  sunshine  in  order  to  stimulate  the  manu 
facture  of  electric  light. 

That  is  not  the  sort  of  protection  in  which  I  believe. 
If  a  given  industry  is  established  here,  if  we  have  nat 
ural  advantages  for  carrying  it  on,  then  the  amount  of 
protection  which  can  fairly  be  asked  is  a  duty  which 
will  suffice  to  cover  the  difference  in  the  labor  and 
other  cost  of  producing  the  article  here  and  producing 
it  abroad,  and  a  slight  additional  margin  to  protect  our 
producers  in  times  of  industrial  depression  or  overpro 
duction  abroad.  If  you  go  beyond  that,  you  are  liable 
to  drift  upon  the  rocks  of  extortion,  of  monopoly,  and 
ultimately  of  Populism. 

In  the  debate  in  April,  1902,  on  a  bill  for  the 
establishment  of  reciprocal  trade  relations  with 

125 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

Cuba,  Mr.  McCall  again  indicated  some  of  the 
limitations  which  should  be  observed  in  the  ap 
plication  of  the  principle  of  protection.  This  is 
not  an  immutable  law,  operating  like  the  law  of 
gravitation,  without  regard  to  changes  of  time  or 
circumstance.  It  should  be  applied  when  it  will 
work  to  the  national  advantage,  and  not  other 
wise.  In  discussing  the  advisability  of  attempting 
to  foster  the  growing  of  sugar  cane  in  the  United 
States,  Mr.  McCall  said:  — 

As  to  the  future  of  cane  sugar  in  the  United  States, 
I  can  see  little  ground  for  optimism.  It  seems  to  me 
it  cannot  stand  beet-sugar  competition  at  home  when 
that  industry  shall  be  developed.  People  who  are  en 
gaged  in  that  industry,  if  they  take  a  far  look  ahead, 
will  prepare  to  use  their  fields  for  some  other  purpose. 
Cuba  is  one  of  the  few  countries  in  the  world  where 
cane  sugar  can  be  raised  in  competition  with  the  beet 
sugar  of  other  nations.  They  need  only  to  plant  their 
cane  on  the  average  once  in  every  ten  years.  In  Loui 
siana  it  must  be  planted  every  two  years  at  a  cost,  as 
was  testified,  of  twenty  dollars  an  acre.  It  is  a  rational 
application  of  protection  to  develop  those  industries 
which  we  are  by  nature  fitted  to  carry  on,  but  a  mere  exotic 
industry,  which  we  are  not  fitted  to  carry  on  and  which 
must  be  maintained  by  a  perpetual  tax  upon  the  Amer 
ican  people,  is  something  which  does  not  come  within 
any  proper  application  of  the  doctrine  of  protection. 

If  the  soil,  the  sunshine,  and  the  air  of  Cuba  will  do 
work  for  the  American  people  which  those  same  natural 
126 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION 

agents  refuse  to  do  in  our  own  country,  it  would  be 
the  grossest  kind  of  waste  for  us  to  refuse  to  accept 
the  benefit  of  those  blessings  and  forever  to  put  upon 
poor  human  nature  the  burden  of  doing  the  work  which 
Nature  herself  would  do  for  us  with  her  lavish  hand. 
We  have  enough  of  avenues  for  the  profitable  employ 
ment  of  labor  without  taxing  ourselves  to  maintain  in 
dustries  which  can  never  be  profitably  maintained. 

In  his  discussion  of  the  Payne  bill  (April  i, 
1909),  he  again  stated  this  underlying  principle 
with  great  clearness  and  force :  — 

The  only  justifiable  object  of  a  protective  tariff  is  to 
develop  in  our  nation  the  industries  which  it  is  naturally 
fitted  to  carry  on.  It  should  not  have  for  an  object  to 
divert  labor  into  channels  where  it  would  be  employed 
at  a  disadvantage.  The  gospel  that  labor  in  itself  is  a 
blessing  is  preached  by  those  who  have  practiced  it  but 
little.  A  country  with  poor  natural  resources  and  a  ster 
ile  soil,  where  a  man  could  wring  from  nature  only  with 
great  difficulty  the  bare  means  of  subsistence,  would  be 
the  ideal  sort  of  a  country,  according  to  some  gentle 
men's  ideas  of  labor.  There  every  one  would  have  an 
opportunity  to  work  and  to  work  hard.  But  such  a  coun 
try  would  be  a  proper  home  for  a  penal  colony  and  not 
for  a  nation.  [Applause.] 

Blessed  as  we  are  with  an  unexampled  variety  of 
splendid  natural  resources  we  should  not  by  legislation 
make  our  country  to  any  degree  the  sort  of  a  land  to 
which  I  have  just  referred.  We  can  employ  our  labor 
with  profit  upon  those  natural  resources  which  are  ours 

127 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

beyond  question,  and  we  do  not  need  to  go  into  the 
hothouse  business  and  to  divert  the  labor  of  America 
into  doing  those  things  which  the  sunshine  and  the  cli 
mate  of  other  lands  would  do  for  us  with  only  a  slight 
contribution  from  labor.  Where  we  are  fitted  by  nature 
to  carry  on  an  industry  with  a  given  amount  of  labor 
as  well  as  it  can  be  carried  on  abroad,  we  should  de 
velop  and  encourage  such  an  industry  j  but  when  we 
embark  upon  lines  which  must  be  followed  permanently 
at  a  disadvantage,  we  waste  labor  and  do  violence  to 
the  laws  of  nature.  Where  the  difference  in  the  labor 
cost  of  production  is  caused,  not  by  the  greater  amount 
of  labor  required,  but  by  the  greater  wage,  there  pro 
tective  laws  should  intervene.  Let  us  employ  our  labor 
in  doing  those  things  which  we  can  do  to  the  best  advan 
tage  and  permit  foreign  nations  to  do  the  work  which 
they  have  greater  natural  advantages  for  doing,  and  then 
exchange  our  products  with  them.  That  is  the  sound 
basis  for  industry  and  for  international  trade.  There  is 
a  great  deal  of  truth  in  the  celebrated  saying  of  Ben- 
tham :  "  Industry  makes  of  government  as  modest  a  re 
quest  as  that  of  Diogenes  to  Alexander,  *  Stand  out  of 
my  sunshine/  ' 

The  Dingley  Act  had  not  been  long  in  opera 
tion  when  the  outbreak  of  war  with  Spain  raised 
a  set  of  new  questions  which  for  several  years  quite 
obscured  the  tariff.  But  on  the  restoration  of 
peace,  agitation  for  a  reduction  of  duties  again 
set  in  and  became  more  and  more  insistent.  The 
Democrats  had  so  fully  committed  themselves 
128 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION 

to  the  economic  hallucinations  of  Mr.  Bryan  as 
to  make  their  party  an  object  of  fear  and  appre 
hension.  Extreme  protectionists,  incited  by  Mark 
Hanna  to  "stand  pat,"  contended  that  when  the 
tariff  was  revised  it  must  be  done  by  its  friends. 
Moderate  men,  who  only  asked  that  the  sched 
ules  might  be  put  upon  a  rational  basis,  had  little 
to  hope  for  from  either  of  these  groups.  But  the 
demand  for  revision  persisted,  and  the  Repub 
lican  Party  committed  itself  to  undertake  it.  The 
need  for  it  was  brought  before  the  House  in 
January,  1906,  in  a  speech  by  Mr.  McCall  which 
attracted  attention  throughout  the  country.  He 
told  the  House  of  the  growing  demand  on  the 
part  of  great  industries  that  they  be  relieved  of  the 
outworn  schedules  of  the  Dingley  Act.  In  defense 
of  the  outspoken  sentiment  of  Massachusetts  he 
said  :  — 

What  is  her  fault  to-day  ?  It  is  that  under  her  system 
of  untrammeled  freedom  of  speech  and  of  public  discus 
sion  a  great  and  increasing  number  of  her  people  have 
dared  to  think  and  to  say  that  the  whirling  changes  of 
the  nine  years  that  have  elapsed  since  the  passage  of 
the  Dingley  Act  have  thrown  some  of  those  great  sched 
ules  out  of  gear  with  existing  conditions,  and  that  some 
duties,  just,  or  at  least  harmless  at  the  time  they  were 
enacted,  have,  by  reason  of  industrial  combination  to 
stifle  internal  competition,  and  from  other  reasons,  be 
come  exorbitant,  and  instead  of  protecting  the  people 

129 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

they  are  shielding  monopoly  and  aiding  it  to  pick  the 
pockets  of  the  people.  [Applause.] 

And  they  are  somewhat  weary  of  seeing  that  ancient 
friend  of  ours  paraded  upon  ceremonial  occasions,  namely, 
u  If  the  tariff  is  to  be  revised,  let  it  be  revised  by  its 
friends."  If  the  tariff  can  ever  be  revised  by  its  friends, 
can  it  not  be  revised  by  a  Congress  two  thirds  of  whose 
members  in  both  the  Senate  and  the  House  are  Repub 
licans  ?  [Applause.] 

I  think  that  our  noble  governor  never  said  a  truer 
word  —  that  a  truer  word  never  was  spoken  —  than 
when  he  said  that  upon  a  "  stand-pat  platform  "  last 
fall  the  State  would  have  been  lost  to  the  Republicans. 

Now,  the  people  of  Massachusetts  are  only  thinking 
a  little  in  advance  of  some  of  the  people — not  all  of 
the  other  people  —  of  this  country.  Soon  this  idea  will 
invade  New  York  and  Illinois  and  Ohio,  gathering  force 
as  it  moves ;  and  I  say  to  you  that  if  we  do  not  treat  pro 
tection  as  a  rational  principle,  instead  of  a  cast-iron, 
immutable  set  of  schedules,  we  are  liable  to  have  the 
Democratic  Party,  and  then  possibly  the  deluge.  [Laugh 
ter  and  applause.] 

It  was  in  commenting  upon  this  speech  that 
the  New  York  "  Sun  "  declared  Mr.  McCall  to 
be  "one  of  the  ablest  men  in  public  life,"  and  a 
few  days  later  it  again  characterized  him  as  "per 
haps  the  most  intellectual  man  in  the  House  and 
without  doubt  the  most  independent." 

On  March  21,  1906,  Mr.  McCall,  on  behalf 
of  the  Republican  members  of  the  Massachusetts 
130 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION 

delegation  in  Congress,  addressed  a  letter  to  the 
chairman  of  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee 
of  the  House,  calling  his  attention  to  the  fact 
that  the  last  Republican  national  platform  de 
clared  that  "  rates  of  duty  should  be  readjusted 
only  when  conditions  have  so  changed  that  the 
public  interest  demands  their  alteration,"  and 
that  in  the  judgment  of  Massachusetts  Repub 
licans  conditions  had  so  changed  as  to  demand 
readjustment,  and  asking  that  the  Committee 
begin  the  consideration  of  the  tariff  with  a  view 
to  its  revision.  To  this  the  chairman  replied  that 
a  majority  of  the  Republican  members  of  the 
House  were  opposed  to  such  action,  and  added, 
"  Congress  is  not  prepared  to  review  the  tariff 
schedules,  in  that  calm,  judicial  frame  of  mind  so 
necessary  to  the  proper  preparation  of  a  tariff 
act  so  near  the  coming  Congressional  elections." 
But  the  events  of  the  next  few  months  showed 
that  Mr.  McCall's  statement  that  "the  people 
of  Massachusetts  were  only  thinking  a  little  in 
advance  of  some  of  the  people  "  was  well-founded. 
In  1908  President  Taft  was  elected  upon  a  plat 
form  which  definitely  committed  the  party  to  a 
revision  of  the  tariff. 

When  the  Republican  Party  finally  undertook 
the  work  of  tariff  revision,  Mr.  McCall  was  not 
only  an  influential  factor  in  bringing  it  about,  but 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

as  one  of  the  oldest  members  of  the  Committee 
on  Ways  and  Means  he  had  an  important  part  in 
the  framing  of  the  new  measure  and  in  explain 
ing  it  to  the  House.  In  the  form  in  which  it 
passed  that  body  it  was  a  sincere  effort  to  revise 
the  tariff  in  accordance  with  the  pledges  made  in 
the  Republican  platform.  Even  as  amended  by 
the  Senate  and  finally  enacted,  the  New  York 
" Nation,"  which  has  no  bias  in  favor  of  protec 
tion,  declared  it  to  be  the  best  tariff  ever  enacted 
by  the  Republican  Party.  And  Mr.  McCall's 
judgment  upon  the  completed  act  was  that  it 
represented  cc  the  greatest  reduction  that  has  been 
made  in  the  tariff  at  any  single  time  since  our 
first  revenue  law  was  signed  by  George  Wash 
ington." 

Mr.  McCalFs  chief  speech  upon  the  Payne 
bill  was  made  in  the  House  April  i,  1909.  He 
was  far  from  endorsing  all  the  features  of  the  act. 
He  had  no  fancy  for  the  inheritance  tax  nor  for 
the  tax  on  tea,  nor  did  he  approve  of  all  the  in 
creases  and  reductions  which  were  made.  But  the 
bill  dealt  with  more  than  five  thousand  articles 
of  commerce,  and  such  a  measure  necessarily  en 
tailed  much  compromise  of  opinion.  After  a  pro 
longed  debate,  it  passed  the  House  by  a  vote  of 
217  to  161.  In  the  Senate  it  suffered  the  fate 
which  usually  befalls  revenue  measures  at  the 
132 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION 

hands  of  that  body,  and  on  its  return  to  the 
House  from  the  conference  committee  there  was 
serious  question  as  to  whether  the  Republican 
majority  would  accept  it.  Mr.  McCall,  as  indi 
cated  above,  was  not  satisfied  with  the  bill  in  all 
its  parts  when  it  was  first  reported  to  the  House. 
He  was  less  satisfied  with  it  in  the  form  in  which 
it  passed  the  House,  and  his  dissatisfaction  was 
vastly  increased  by  the  changes  made  by  the  Sen 
ate.  Nevertheless,  he  urged  the  House  to  accept 
the  conference  report.  Much  as  he  objected  to 
many  features  of  the  bill,  he  believed  that  it  was 
a  great  improvement  upon  the  existing  law.  He 
felt  also  that  the  honor  of  the  Republican  Party 
and  its  duty  to  its  President  required  the  passage 
of  the  bill.  The  party  was  pledged  to  a  revision 
of  the  tariff  downward,  and  while  this  bill  did  not 
go  as  far  as  Mr.  McCall  wished,  he  believed 
that  its  rejection  would  lead  to  the  abandonment 
at  that  session  of  all  further  attempts  to  reduce 
the  duties. 

When  the  tariff  again  came  before  Congress 
in  the  summer  of  1911,  Mr.  McCall  was  able 
to  justify  his  faith  in  the  Payne  bill  by  point 
ing  to  accomplished  results.  He  was  able  to  show 
that  in  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1911,  the 
free  imports  into  the  United  States  had  been 
$770,000,000,  while  the  dutiable  imports  had 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

amounted  to  only  $749,000,000,  upon  which 
duties  amounting  to  $3 13,000,000,  or  an  average 
ad  valorem  of  20.54  per  cent,  had  been  collected. 
This  was  a  lower  ad  valorem  than  had  been  im 
posed  either  by  the  Wilson  bill,  the  Dingley 
bill,  or  the  McKinley  bill.  "And  yet  gentle 
men  say  that  this  was  revision  upward."  At  the 
same  time  the  total  exports  from  the  United 
States  exceeded  two  billion  dollars  —  the  largest 
in  the  history  of  the  country. 

An  important  phase  of  tariff  legislation  with 
which  Mr.  McCall  had  much  to  do  concerned 
reciprocity  with  neighboring  countries.  The  ac 
ceptance  of  the  principle  was  not  inconsistent 
with  the  maintenance  of  a  protective  policy,  and 
many  of  the  most  ardent  advocates  of  extreme 
protection  had  also  supported  various  forms  of 
reciprocity.  In  one  of  his  first  speeches  on  this 
subject,  Mr.  McCall  said:  — 

I  think  "  reciprocity  "  is  a  word  that  no  gentleman 
on  either  side  of  the  House  can  properly  take  offense 
at.  I  believe  that  the  first  reciprocity  treaty  was  negoti 
ated  by  Richard  Cobden,  and  that  the  greatest  advocate 
of  reciprocity  in  our  time  was  William  McKinley.  The 
name  of  one  is  a  synonym  for  free  trade,  and  the  name 
of  the  other  is  a  synonym  for  protection. 

Reciprocity  goes  upon  the  theory  that  there  are  often 
times,  in  the  relations  of  two  peoples,  conditions  that 
make  it  peculiarly  proper  that  they  shall  have  reciprocal 

134 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION 

trade  arrangements  with  each  other.  The  position  of 
Cuba,  her  political  relations  to  this  country,  the  fact 
that  American  interests  predominate  there,  the  fact  that 
we  buy  nearly  all  she  has  to  sell,  and  sell  her  a  great 
portion  of  what  she  buys,  make  her  case,  it  seems  to 
me,  as  strong  a  one  as  could  be  imagined  for  the  appli 
cation  of  the  principle  of  reciprocity. 

In  the  case  of  Cuba  the  argument  for  reci 
procity  might  be  based  either  upon  the  economic 
advantages  which  would  result  to  both  coun 
tries  or  upon  the  moral  obligation  resting  upon 
the  United  States  to  do  all  that  was  in  its  power 
to  set  Cuba  upon  its  feet.  Mr.  McCall  believed 
that  the  policy  was  sound  from  whichever  stand 
point  it  was  approached.  The  chief  opposition  to 
the  measure  on  economic  grounds  came  from  the 
beet-sugar  interests,  which  attempted  to  win  sup 
port  for  their  cause  by  conjuring  up  the  Sugar 
Trust.  In  the  debate,  on  April  14, 1 902,  Mr.  Mc 
Call  said  :  — 

I  do  not  think  it  is  exactly  fair  to  discredit  the 
cause  of  Cuba  by  bringing  in  the  Sugar  Trust  or  by 
holding  up  the  Sugar  Trust  as  the  beneficiary  of  this 
legislation.  Of  course  we  understand  that  the  Sugar 
Trust  is  a  bogy  that  it  is  always  safe  to  batter,  but  I  do 
not  think  that  in  the  consideration  of  an  economic 
question  we  should  be  frightened  from  looking  at 
the  facts  as  they  are  in  the  light  of  economic  principles. 
...  I  for  one  decline  now,  as  I  did  two  years  ago,  to 

'35 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

be  frightened  from  the  calm  consideration  of  an  economic 
measure  by  this  conjuring  with  the  octopus.  .  .  . 

Mr.  McCall  then  suggested  some  of  the  prob 
able  consequences  of  the  rejection  of  the  measure. 
Suppose  Congress  should  refuse  to  foster  Cuban 
industry,  and  that  in  consequence  the  Cuban 
people  should  suffer  such  financial  distress  as  to 
lead  to  outbreaks  of  disorder  in  the  island.  For 
the  protection  of  life  and  property  and  the  rees- 
tablishmentof  stable  conditions,  the  Government 
of  the  United  States  might  assume  permanent 
control  of  Cuba. 

What  will  become  of  the  beet-sugar  industry  then  ? 
I  confess  it  is  hardly  a  satisfactory  answer  which  gentle 
men  give  to  that  proposition,  to  say  to  us  grandly  that 
we  will  face  that  crisis  when  we  reach  it. 

It  is  a  simple  question  :  What  will  the  beet-sugar  in 
dustry  do  if  Cuba  is  annexed  ?  It  will  not  meet  the  point 
to  say  that  they  will  then  have  to  produce  sugar  under 
a  protected  market  and  with  severe  anti-immigration  and 
anti-contract-labor  laws,  because  the  provisions  of  this 
bill  will  put  upon  Cuba,  if  she  shall  assent  to  them,  our 
own  contract-labor  laws  and  will  put  her  under  our 
protected  markets,  so  that  practically  all  her  supplies 
bought  from  other  nations  will  be  purchased  in  this 
market. 

If  our  beet-sugar  industry  cannot  hold  its  own  with 
Cuba,  with  a  specific  duty  equal  to  67.5  of  the  cost  of 
Cuban  production,  what  will  happen  when  Cuban  sugar 

136 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION 

has  absolutely  free  access  to  our  market  ?  The  great 
threat  to  the  sugar  industry  of  this  country  does  not 
come  from  this  bill,  but  it  will  come  from  a  failure  to  pass 
the  bill.  It  will  come  from  a  condition  which  makes  an 
nexation  necessary.  Viewed,  therefore,  simply  from  its 
economic  aspects  as  a  measure  to  promote  international 
trade,  I  think  it  is  entirely  clear  that  the  pending  bill  will 
be  for  the  interests  of  both  countries  and  will  injure  no 
class  of  people  in  either  nation. 

When  the  Payne  bill  was  before  the  House, 
Mr.  McCall  urged  that  the  peculiar  geographical 
relations  between  the  United  States  and  Canada 
be  considered,  and  that  the  duties  upon  certain 
products  be  mutually  remitted.  The  argument 
in  favor  of  such  a  policy  with  regard  to  coal  was 
stated  in  these  words  :  — 

I  will  now  speak  concerning  the  paragraph  for  reci 
procity  on  coal,  which,  in  effect,  means  that  if  Canada 
will  admit  our  coal  free  of  duty  we  will  extend  the 
same  privilege  to  her  coal.  In  the  last  fiscal  year  we  ex 
ported  to  Canada  8,592,296  tons  of  coal  and  imported 
from  the  same  country  1,297,405  tons.  It  will  be  seen 
that  our  exports  to  Canada  considerably  exceed  our  im 
ports.  Each  country  has  a  duty  against  the  coal  of  the 
other.  The  coal  question  as  between  the  two  countries 
largely  resolves  itself  into  a  question  of  freight.  A  glance 
at  the  map  will  show  that.  The  great  Province  of  On 
tario  is  remote  from  the  Canadian  coal-fields  and  near 
to  our  own  coal  in  Ohio,  Pennsylvania,  and  West 
Virginia.  On  the  other  hand,  our  northeastern  seaboard 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

is  remote  from  our  own  coal-fields  and  contiguous  to 
the  fields  of  Nova  Scotia.  By  setting  up  mutual  barriers 
against  coal  it  can  be  transported  from  the  mines  of 
Canada  farther  into  the  central  parts  of  that  country 
and  can  also  be  carried  from  our  mines  farther  into 
those  regions  of  this  country  which  would  naturally  be 
served  by  the  Canadian  coal.  These  tariffs  are  expended 
in  each  case  in  paying  the  useless  hauling  of  freight.  If 
we  remove  them,  we  shall  supply  from  our  mines  the 
territory  of  Canada  naturally  tributary  to  them,  and  our 
own  people,  who  are  nearer  the  Canadian  mines,  may 
have  an  opportunity  to  get  access  to  them.  Why  should 
each  nation  create  artificial  barriers  in  order  that  labor 
may  be  uselessly  employed  in  carrying  this  heavy  com 
modity?  The  reciprocal  removal  of  the  coal  duties  will 
thus  take  off  a  tax  upon  the  coal  miner  and  the  con 
sumer  of  both  countries  and  will  benefit  both. 

More  far-reaching  than  either  of  these  pro 
posals  was  the  measure  introduced  into  the 
House  in  191 1  which  provided  remission  of  duties 
upon  a  considerable  number  of  Canadian  prod 
ucts  in  return  for  similar  concessions  by  Canada. 
The  action  taken  by  Canada  in  response  to  the 
advances  made  to  her  has  removed  the  question 
from  the  field  of  practical  politics,  but  the  episode 
played  too  important  a  part  in  our  history  to 
be  ignored.  For  many  years  statesmen  in  both 
countries  had  been  impressed  by  the  fact  that 
purely  artificial  barriers  prevented  trade  from  fol- 

138 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION 

lowing  its  natural  channels.  On  her  northern 
border  Canada  was  lost  in  the  uninhabitable  re 
gions  of  the  Arctic.  To  the  east  and  west  she  was 
hemmed  in  by  vast  expanses  of  ocean.  To  the 
south  lay  a  rich  and  powerful  neighbor,  from 
whom  she  was  separated  by  only  an  imaginary 
line,  and  from  whom,  in  spite  of  her  compara 
tively  small  population,  she  purchased  more 
goods  than  the  United  States  sold  to  France,  and 
almost  as  much  as  we  sold  to  Germany.  The 
value  of  the  exports  from  the  United  States  to 
Canada  equaled  the  value  of  the  exports  from 
Great  Britain  to  her  Indian  Empire.  The  great 
frontier  of  thirty-seven  hundred  miles  —  the 
longest  frontier  between  any  two  countries  — 
did  not  offer  a  single  natural  barrier  to  the  freest 
intercourse.  It  is  not  strange  that  many  states 
men  in  both  countries  had  sought  to  remove  the 
barriers  created  by  law.  Both  Blaine  and  Mc- 
Kinley  had  advocated  it.  President  Roosevelt 
approved  of  it,  and  President  Taft  made  it  one 
of  the  chief  measures  of  his  administration.  It 
was  at  the  request  of  President  Taft  that  Mr. 
McCall  introduced  the  bill  and  took  charge  of  it 
in  the  House.  His  chief  speech  upon  it  was,  in 
point  of  clear  analysis,  learning,  and  eloquence, 
one  of  the  most  important  which  he  delivered 
during  his  whole  term  in  Congress.  Opponents 

139 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

of  the  bill  cited  the  example  of  Bismarck  who 
had  imposed  duties  upon  imports  of  agricultural 
products  into  Germany.  To  this  Mr. /McCall 
replied,  "Bismarck  did  not  establish  agricultural 
duties  so  much  for  the  sake  of  agriculture  as  to 
placate  the  powerful  agrarian  element  and  estab 
lish  generally  in  Germany  the  policy  of  protec 
tion."  He  also  showed  how  in  other  ways  the 
agrarian  element  dictated  the  policy  of  the  Ger 
man  Government. 

Many  persons  feared  that  the  cheaper  agri 
cultural  lands  of  Canada  would  prove  attractive 
to  young  men  from  the  United  States,  and  cited 
the  State  of  Iowa,  whose  population  had  de 
creased  in  the  preceding  decade,  as  an  example 
of  the  results  to  be  expected.  To  this  Mr.  Mc 
Call  said  :  — 

Young  men  have  gone  from  Iowa  because  they  could 
get  more  land  in  Canada  than  at  home.  .  .  .  Suppose 
they  shall  found  upon  the  eastern  slopes  of  the  Can 
adian  Rockies  a  newer  and  a  fairer  Iowa.  Who  is  there 
who  will  not  wish  them  Godspeed  ?  [Applause.] 

Again,  the  opposition  urged  that  just  as  the 
farmers  of  New  England  had  gone  down  before 
the  competition  of  the  Western  farmers,  so  the 
latter  would  be  the  victims  of  the  farmers  of 
Canada.  To  this  Mr.  McCall  said:  — 
140 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION 

So  far  as  competition  with  Canada  is  concerned,  if 
North  Dakota,  which  has  a  longer  summer  and  a  shorter 
winter  than  Canada,  can  be  a  part  of  the  same  agricul 
tural  domain  and  can  compete  with  Kansas  and  Iowa 
and  Oklahoma  and  those  wonderfully  rich  lands  toward 
the  south,  lands  as  fertile  as  those  in  Campania,  where, 
as  Virgil  said  — 

"  Summer  borrows  months  beyond  her  own  ; 
Twice  the  teeming  flocks  are  fruitful, 
Twice  the  laden  orchards  groan  ' '  — 

if  North  Dakota  can  compete  with  lands  like  these, 
what  has  she  to  fear  from  the  more  frosty  Alberta  ? 
What  has  Minnesota  to  fear  from  Manitoba  when  she 
can  prosper  side  by  side  with  Iowa  and  Nebraska? 

The  opposition  really  centered  upon  the  argu 
ment  that  the  adoption  of  the  bill  would  lower 
the  price  received  by  the  American  farmer  for 
his  wheat.  Mr.  McCall  showed  conclusively 
that  so  long  as  the  United  States  exported  wheat, 
the  price  received  by  the  American  farmer  would 
be  fixed  in  the  market  which  took  his  surplus, 
and  he  concluded  his  speech  with  this  beautiful 
passage :  — 

The  boundary  line  between  these  two  countries 
stretches,  as  I  have  said,  for  thirty-seven  hundred 
miles.  There  is  no  modern  fort  along  that  line. 
After  the  War  of  1812,  by  the  Rush-Bagehot  Treaty, 
we  agreed  to  have  no  further  armaments  upon  the 
Great  Lakes,  although  two  of  the  chief  battles  of  that 

141 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

war  had  been  fought  upon  them.  Great  cities,  with 
billions  of  dollars  of  property,  with  fabulous  wealth, 
have  grown  up  along  that  boundary.  They  are  not  de 
fended  by  a  single  gun,  but  there  are  no  cities  in  all 
the  world  that  are  more  safe,  because  they  are  fortified 
and  guarded  by  the  good  sense,  the  common  interests, 
and  the  friendly  sentiments  of  two  great  nations.  [Ap 
plause.]  We  have  forts,  it  is  true,  and  guns  along  that 
line,  but  they  are  antiquated  and  the  survivals  of  a  time 
long  past.  And  we  have  made  the  dreams  of  the  poets 
come  true,  for  the  boys  wage  mimic  wars  in  the  crum 
bling  embrasures  of  the  forts,  the  birds  build  their  nests 
in  the  lips  of  the  cannon,  and  little  children  play  upon 
them  and  clasp  their  silent  throats.  We  can  just  as 
safely  dismantle  the  tariff  forts  between  the  two  coun 
tries.  Canada  is  one  with  us  in  sentiment.  She  is  one 
with  us  in  all  the  strongest  ties  that  can  draw  nations 
together ;  and  I  trust  that  this  side  of  the  House  will 
vie  with  that  side  of  the  House  and  support  the 
President  of  the  United  States  in  the  enlightened  and 
civilized  policy  proposed  by  this  bill.  [Prolonged 
applause.] 

The  measure  was  duly  adopted  by  Congress, 
and  was  made  the  issue  in  the  ensuing  electoral 
campaign  in  Canada.  There  it  was  defeated, 
largely  through  the  fears  aroused  by  the  levity 
and  irresponsible  utterances  of  an  American  poli 
tician,  who  seemed  not  to  realize  that  his  occu 
pancy  of  the  high  office  of  Speaker  of  the  House 
gave  to  his  words  abroad  a  weight  to  which  their 
142 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION 

intrinsic  merit  did  not  entitle  them,  and  which 
they  did  not  have  at  home.  When  the  subject 
came  before  Congress  again  in  the  summer  of 
1912,  Mr.  McCall  said  :  — 

Reciprocity  was  pressed  upon  the  attention  of  Can 
ada  as  involving  annexation  to  this  country.  If  I  were 
to  give  an  opinion  upon  that  point,  I  should  say  that 
those  political  ties  are  most  apt  to  be  permanent  which 
coincide  with  the  material  interests  of  a  people,  and 
that  such  ties  are  subjected  to  a  severe  strain  when  they 
are  maintained  at  the  sacrifice  of  natural  advantages. 
If  I  am  correct,  then  reciprocity  would  certainly  not 
weaken  the  present  political  relations  of  Canada.  Polit 
ical  relations  are  in  greater  danger  from  laws  which 
stand  in  the  path  of  commerce  than  they  are  in  from 
laws  which  recognize  commercial  rights.  The  Tories 
of  Lord  North's  breed  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic 
should  remember  that  taxation  laws  framed  to  divert 
trade  from  its  natural  channels  will  be  more  fraught 
with  danger  to  the  continued  possession  by  Great 
Britain  of  her  colonies  than  the  more  enlightened  policy 
which  she  has  recently  been  pursuing.  If  the  great 
Provinces  of  Alberta  and  Saskatchewan  and  Manitoba 
are  prevented  from  trading  with  their  neighbors  across 
the  border,  in  Minnesota  and  other  States,  and  if  the 
price  of  their  continued  allegiance  to  the  British  Crown 
is  to  compel  them  to  send  their  produce  two  thousand 
miles  to  the  seaboard  and  then  across  the  ocean,  and 
to  pay  preferential  duties  of  thirty-three  per  cent  in 
order  to  force  them  to  consume  British  goods,  then  I 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

think  no  better  way  could  be  devised  to  lead  those  great 
Provinces  to  drift  away  from  Great  Britain  and  to  cause 
the  dismemberment  of  the  Empire. 

But  this  is  no  concern  of  ours.  Canada  must  work 
out  her  own  destiny.  It  is  for  her  to  say  whether 
the  obstruction  of  the  pathway  to  her  natural  markets, 
whether,  indeed,  complete  non-intercourse  with  the 
United  States,  will  be  the  tie  to  bind  her  more  firmly  to 
the  motherland.  Even  in  that  event  I  imagine  we  shall 
be  able  to  survive.  This  arrangement  will  benefit  us, 
but  Canada  relatively  much  more. 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS 

THE  presidential  election  of  1896  turned 
chiefly  upon  the  money  question.  The  ex 
plicit  declaration  in  the  Republican  platform  in 
favor  of  the  gold  standard  and  the  equally  expli 
cit  declaration  of  the  Democrats  in  favor  of  the 
free  coinage  of  silver,  together  with  the  well- 
known  views  of  that  party's  nominee,  caused  the 
question  as  to  what  should  be  the  country's  mon 
etary  standard  to  overshadow  all  others.  For 
almost  a  generation,  however,  another  question 
had  vexed  succeeding  administrations  at  Wash 
ington,  each  of  which  had  been  glad  to  hand 
over  the  problem  to  the  next  for  solution.  The 
island  of  Cuba,  a  colonial  dependency  of  Spain, 
had  been  in  a  condition  of  disorder  for  many  years. 
Its  proximity  to  the  United  States  and  the  ex 
tent  of  American  interests  in  its  commerce,  and 
the  stories  of  the  inhumanity  connected  with  the 
warfare  in  the  island,  made  the  restoration  of  or 
der  a  matter  of  pressing  importance  to  the  Amer 
ican  Government.  When  feeling  in  this  country 
was  already  almost  at  the  breaking  point,  the 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

American  battleship  Maine  was  sunk,  on  Febru 
ary  15,  1898,  in  the  harbor  of  Havana.  The 
cause  of  this  disaster  still  remains  unknown. 
Nothing,  however,  has  ever  been  disclosed  which 
in  any  way  implicated  the  Government  of  Spain. 
But  whatever  the  cause,  the  conviction  grew  that 
the  dominion  of  Spain  in  Cuba  must  cease.  In 
Congress,  so  far  as  is  known,  there  was  absolute 
unanimity  of  opinion  on  this  point.  The  only 
question  which  still  remained  open  was  as  to  the 
method  by  which  the  desired  result  should  be 
accomplished.  It  is  now  known,  on  the  testimony 
of  General  Woodford,  American  Minister  to 
Spain  in  1898,  that  the  Spanish  Government  also 
saw  that  withdrawal  from  Cuba  was  inevitable, 
and  was  prepared  to  submit.  He  has  given  it  as 
his  opinion  that  a  further  delay  of  twenty-four 
hours  would  have  resulted  in  the  acceptance  by 
Spain  of  proposals  entirely  satisfactory  to  the 
United  States.  But  Congress  was  bent  on  war, 
and  only  such  a  President  as  Grover  Cleveland 
or  Thomas  B.  Reed  could  have  withstood  the 
pressure  brought  to  bear  in  support  of  that  pol 
icy.  President  McKinley  could  not,  by  the  wild 
est  flight  of  the  imagination,  be  compared  in  stay 
ing  power  with  such  men  as  Cleveland  or  Reed, 
and  the  war  came. 

When  it  was  seen  that  hostilities  might  be 
146 


THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS 

imminent,  a  resolution  was  introduced  in  the 
House  appropriating  fifty  million  dollars  to  be 
expended  at  the  discretion  of  the  President  for 
the  national  defense.  Mr.  McCall  supported  this 
resolution,  "  because  it  is  a  prudent  measure  of 
defense  and  is  in  no  sense  an  act  of  aggressive 
war."  The  bill  passed  the  House  unanimously. 
After  the  receipt  of  the  report  of  the  commission 
appointed  to  investigate  the  sinking  of  the  Maine, 
—  an  investigation  in  which  the  Government  of 
Spain  was  not  allowed  to  participate,  —  President 
McKinley  threw  up  his  hands  and  transmitted  a 
message  in  which  he  said, "  The  issue  is  now  with 
Congress."  In  the  early  hours  of  April  19,  1898, 
the  House  adopted  a  joint  resolution  making 
demands  upon  Spain  which  inevitably  entailed 
war.  Mr.  McCall  was  one  of  the  six  members 
of  the  House  who  voted  against  it.  Of  these  six 
who  were  strongly  in  favor  of  the  utmost  utiliza 
tion  of  the  resources  of  diplomacy  before  resort 
ing  to  war,  —  a  course  which  General  Woodford 
believed  would  be  successful,  —  four  had  served 
in  the  Civil  War  and  knew  what  war  meant. 
The  other  two  were  too  young  for  such  service. 
The  attitude  of  Mr.  McCall  toward  the  war 
with  Spain  was  like  that  of  Lord  Bryce  toward 
the  South  African  War.  Bryce  looked  upon  that 
war  as  unjustifiable,  but  having  been  begun  he 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

assisted  the  Government  in  fighting  it  out  and 
bringing  it  to  a  conclusion.  So  likewise  Mr. 
McCall  voted  in  Congress  for  all  the  measures 
which  were  necessary  for  the  prosecution  of  hos 
tilities  after  they  had  once  been  begun.  In  the 
discussion  of  the  war  revenue  bill,  on  April  28, 
1898,  after  saying  that  there  had  been  differ 
ences  of  opinion  as  to  "  the  wisdom  and  the 
justice  and  the  expediency  of  this  war,"  Mr. 
McCall  continued  :  — 

Since  war  has  been  declared  by  the  high  constitu 
tional  authority  of  this  Government,  and  our  warships 
have  been  set  in  motion,  and  our  youth  have  been 
summoned  from  their  homes,  —  destined,  perhaps,  like 
the  youth  of  Athens,  "  to  perish  from  the  city  like  the 
spring  from  the  year,"  —  the  high,  and  urgent,  and 
patriotic  duty  that  is  upon  us  now  is  to  give  to  those 
men  whom  we  have  summoned  into  a  position  of  dan 
ger  our  prompt,  ungrudging,  and  generous  support. 

The  war  with  Spain  was  in  itself  a  matter  of 
small  moment.  To  be  sure,  it  disclosed  that  a 
training  camp  in  the  United  States  was  attended 
with  greater  danger  to  the  enlisted  men  than  a 
battle  with  the  Spanish  forces,  and  the  adminis 
trative  methods  of  the  War  Department  were 
almost  criminal  in  their  inefficiency.  The  chief 
importance  of  the  war  with  Spain,  however,  lies 
in  the  annexation  of  territories  which  are  not  now 
148 


THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS 

and  never  can  be  fit  for  admission  to  the  Federal 
Union.  For  the  first  time  in  our  history  territory 
was  annexed  which,  from  its  situation  and  the 
character  of  its  inhabitants,  can  never  be  held  as 
anything  else  than  a  dependency.  It  has  been  the 
great  good  fortune  of  the  United  States  that  prior 
to  1898  every  one  of  its  territorial  acquisitions 
consisted  of  lands  possessing  almost  no  inhab 
itants  and  well  fitted  by  nature  to  become  the 
home  of  people  of  the  white  race.  With  the  ac 
quisition  of  the  Philippines  the  country  entered 
upon  a  course  which  necessitated  the  holding  of 
tropical  territories  not  only  unfit  for  settlement 
by  a  white  population,  but  also  inhabited  by 
some  seven  million  people  who  accepted  Ameri 
can  rule  only  when  it  was  forced  upon  them  at 
the  point  of  the  bayonet.  The  situation  of  the 
islands  also  involved  their  possessors  in  Asiatic 
politics  to  a  degree  incommensurate  with  our  in 
terests  in  that  quarter. 

The  acquisition  of  Porto  Rico,  in  view  of  its 
proximity  to  the  United  States,  was  natural,  and 
if  it  had  been  followed  by  the  bestowal  of  Amer 
ican  citizenship  upon  its  inhabitants  would  have 
met  with  general  acquiescence  on  their  part.  The 
Philippines  were  annexed  apparently  because  Pres 
ident  McKinley  did  not  know  what  else  to  do 
with  them.  There  have  been  few  instances  in  the 

149 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

history  of  the  English-speaking  race  when  poli 
cies  of  the  first  importance  have  been  determined 
by  a  man  who  seemed  to  be  actuated  so  little  by 
any  guiding  principle.  A  few  months  after  the 
annexation,  when  the  United  States  was  bending 
all  its  efforts  to  subjugating  the  Filipino  insur 
gents,  —  a  task  which  occupied  it  for  some  years, 
—  President  McKinley  solemnly  declared  in  a 
message  to  Congress,  "  I  had  every  reason  to  be 
lieve,  and  I  still  believe,  that  this  transfer  of  sov 
ereignty  was  in  accordance  with  the  wishes  and 
the  aspirations  of  the  great  mass  of  the  Filipino 
people." 

In  the  decision  that  the  Philippines  should 
be  acquired  by  the  United  States,  the  House  of 
Representatives  had  no  voice,  but  their  acquisi 
tion  and  that  of  Porto  Rico  raised  a  set  of  ques 
tions  in  constitutional  law  and  governmental 
policy  which  were  entirely  new  in  American  his 
tory.  Their  solution  was  made  the  more  diffi 
cult  by  the  fact  that  the  Government  had  adopted 
no  policy  with  reference  to  which  its  action  on 
measures  affecting  our  colonial  dependencies 
should  be  framed.  Whether  legislation  was  to 
be  formulated  for  a  group  of  tropical  islands  which 
we  expected  to  hold  in  permanent  subjection,  or 
in  which  we  expected  to  establish  an  autono 
mous  government  under  an  American  protec- 
150 


THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS 

torate,  or  from  which  we  intended  soon  to  with 
draw,  leaving  the  government  in  the  hands  of 
those  to  whom  nature  gave  it  —  nothing  of  this 
had  been  decided.  In  the  debate  on  the  Army 
Bill  in  December,  1900,  Mr.  McCall  argued 
that  it  was  the  duty  of  the  United  States  to 
make  up  its  mind  as  to  what  disposition  it  in 
tended  to  make  of  the  islands:  — 

It  seems  to  me  the  time  has  arrived  at  last  when  the 
question  of  the  ultimate  relations  of  this  country  to  the 
Philippine  Archipelago  should  be  considered  and  our 
position  as  a  nation  declared.  Before  the  treaty  we 
were  told  that  the  question  could  not  with  propriety 
be  discussed;  that  we  were  at  war  with  Spain,  and  that 
a  discussion  of  that  character  should  wait  the  return  of 
peace.  After  peace  had  been  declared,  and  we  had 
bought  from  her  the  civil  war  which  we  had  at  least 
encouraged  against  her,  we  were  told  that  it  would  not 
do  to  discuss  the  ultimate  relations  of  the  Philippine 
Islands  with  us  while  they  were  in  what  was  called  a 
state  of  rebellion  against  their  purchasers.  We  have 
been  told,  however,  with  a  good  deal  of  iteration  by 
our  generals  and  commissioners  and  other  civil  officers, 
that  the  organized  rebellion  was  broken  up;  that  an 
appearance  of  war  was  only  kept  up  by  the  hope  of  a 
political  occurrence  in  this  country  which  has  not  taken 
place. 

If  the  question  cannot  with  propriety  be  discussed 
to-day,  if  we  must  wait  until  the  Philippine  Islands  are 
as  peaceful  as  Ohio  or  Massachusetts,  I  fear  that  it 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

will  never  become  proper  for  us  to  discuss  what  our 
duties  and  our  interests  demand,  but  we  shall  be  thrust 
along  to  one  ill-considered  step  after  another  until  our 
position  shall  become  irretrievably  fixed.  In  my  opinion 
our  policy  in  the  Philippines  should  have  been  declared 
at  the  outset  and  should  have  been  a  similar  policy  to 
that  which  we  declared  for  Cuba.  Unfortunately,  our 
course  was  consistent  with  no  other  theory  than  that 
the  Filipino  had  been  fighting  simply  for  a  change  of 
masters  and  that  the  yoke  of  the  United  States  might 
be  substituted  for  the  yoke  of  Spain.  If  we  had  prac 
ticed  a  similar  policy  in  Cuba,  which  some  influential 
gentlemen  seem  to  regret,  who  can  doubt  that  we 
should  have  had  a  war  in  Cuba  as  we  have  one  in  the 
Philippine  Islands? 

In  his  discussion  as  to  what  the  policy  of 
America  toward  the  Philippines  should  be,  Mr. 
McCall  resorted  in  his  accustomed  manner  to 
fundamental  principles.  He  pointed  out  that, 
geographically  and  ethnologically,  the  people  of 
those  islands  and  the  people  of  the  United  States 
are  poles  apart.  This  in  itself  constituted  such 
an  obvious  barrier  that  no  advocate  of  retaining 
the  islands  had  ever  suggested  that  they  be 
made  a  part  of  the  American  political  system. 
The  islands  were  also  unfit  to  become  a  colony 
to  which  the  surplus  population  of  the  United 
States  could  be  sent.  Even  if  we  had  a  surplus 
population,  the  white  race  cannot  colonize  the 
152 


THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS 

tropics,  and  particularly  it  cannot  colonize  the 
Philippines  which  are  already  as  densely  populated 
as  New  England.  But  all  of  Mr.  McCall's  ar 
guments  on  the  Philippines  come  back  in  the 
last  analysis  to  the  fundamental  precept  that 
one  people  has  no  right  to  subjugate  another. 
He  accepted  literally  the  doctrine  of  the  Dec 
laration  of  Independence,  that  all  governments 
"  derive  their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of 
the  governed."  But  it  was  said  that  the  Fili 
pinos  were  incapable  of  self-government.  To  this 
Mr.  McCall  replied  that  doubtless  they  could 
not  maintain  a  government  which  would  rank 
very  high  according  to  American  standards,  but 
whatever  government  they  fashioned  for  them 
selves  would  be  better  than  any  government  that 
could  be  forced  upon  them  by  an  alien  power. 
"The  Filipino,"  he  said,  "does  not,  perhaps, 
come  up  to  Anglo-Saxon  standards  and  should 
not  be  judged  by  them.  .  .  .  He  seems  ad 
vanced  enough,  however,  to  fight  for  his  free 
dom.  Give  him  the  benefit  of  that." 

At  a  time  when  governmental  expenditures 
are  increasing  at  an  appalling  rate,  the  cost  of 
holding  the  Philippines  is  an  important  consid 
eration.  In  his  speech  on  the  Army  Bill,  De 
cember  5,  1900,  Mr.  McCall  said,  "As  a  portion 
of  the  cost  of  retaining  the  Philippine  Islands 

'53 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

we  are  to  include  the  maintenance  of  the  greater 
part  of  the  army  established  by  this  very  bill"; 
and  he  proceeded  to  show  that  the  amount  ex 
pended  by  the  United  States  for  military  pur 
poses  was  greater  than  the  combined  expenditure 
of  France  and  Germany.  Men  who  have  held 
high  office  in  the  Philippines  have  solemnly  as 
sured  us  that  the  possession  of  the  islands  costs 
us  nothing.  Yet  within  the  last  few  weeks  high 
naval  officers  have  informed  committees  of  Con 
gress,  who  are  formulating  legislation  to  meet 
the  new  demand  for  national  preparedness,  that 
without  the  Philippines  two  warships  would  do 
the  work  of  three.  In  other  words,  the  posses 
sion  of  this  outpost  in  Asia  requires  a  naval  force 
fifty  percent  larger  than  would  otherwise  be  neces 
sary  for  adequate  national  defense.  And  yet  we 
are  told  that  the  Philippines  cost  us  nothing. 

Mr.  McCall's  speech  on  the  Army  Bill  was 
noteworthy  for  its  thorough  examination  of  the 
experience  of  other  countries  in  the  management  of 
colonies.  In  this  he  gave  an  illustration  of  that 
characteristic  of  which  the  Washington  "Post" 
said,  "The  Massachusetts  member  has  a  reputa 
tion  for  going  pretty  thoroughly  into  questions 
on  which  he  undertakes  to  address  the  House." 
Mr.  McCall  appealed  to  the  history  of  Eng 
land  in  Jamaica  and  in  India,  to  the  experience 
154 


THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS 

of  France  in  Tonkin  and  Madagascar,  and  to 
that  of  Italy  in  the  districts  conquered  from  Ab 
yssinia,  all  of  which  showed  that  these  colonies 
were  from  a  financial  standpoint  losing  ven 
tures.  And  there  was  no  reason  to  hope  that  the 
Philippines  would  be  any  more  profitable  to  the 
United  States  than  the  tropical  colonies  of  other 
countries  had  been  to  them. 

Mr.  McCall  also  showed  that  the  annexation 
of  territories  outside  the  western  hemisphere 
greatly  weakened  our  position  with  reference  to 
our  one  great  tradition  in  foreign  policy  known 
as  the  Monroe  Doctrine:  — 

The  assertion  of  a  policy  of  Asiatic  domination  will 
bring  the  Monroe  Doctrine  tumbling  about  our  ears, 
for  we  shall  make  ourselves  the  laughing-stock  of  man 
kind  if  we  say  to  the  overcrowded  nations  of  the  other 
hemisphere,  "  Keep  your  hands  of?  the  empty  and  un 
occupied  portions  of  this  continent,"  and  then  at  the  same 
time,  having  a  sparse  population,  embrace  a  thousand 
islands  in  the  other  hemisphere.  Such  a  course  would 
deprive  the  Monroe  Doctrine  of  the  last  appearance  of 
justice,  and  thenceforward  it  would  have  to  stand  upon 
force  alone. 

He  also  pointed  out  that  the  holding  of  the 
Philippines  would  add  another  to  the  race  prob 
lems  with  which  our  country  is  troubled  and  which 
seem  necessarily  to  arise  whenever  men  of  Anglo- 

155 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

Saxon  blood  attempt  to  rule  a  people  of  another 
color.  The  experience  of  England  in  Africa, 
India,  and  China,  as  well  as  our  own  experience 
in  the  South  and  in  the  Philippines  since  the  date 
of  Mr.  McCall's  speech,  amply  justify  his  warn 
ing.  The  speech  concludes  with  a  fine  tribute  to 
the  spirit  in  which  the  Filipinos  were  endeavor 
ing  to  maintain  their  independence:  — 

I  have  seen  this  spirit  called  somewhere,  and  I  think 
admirably  called,  the  u  unconquerable  spirit."  It  is  the 
spirit  that  kept  George  Washington  fighting  after  Valley 
Forge.  It  is  the  spirit  which  animates  DeWet  to-day 
in  South  Africa  after  the  organization  of  the  republican 
armies  has  been  destroyed  and  they  have  been  broken  up 
into  bands  of  roving  patriots.  It  is  the  same  spirit  which, 
according  to  the  reports  of  our  own  generals,  has  broken 
down  tribal  lines  and  made  the  people  of  the  Philippines 
unanimous  in  their  hostility  to  this  nation.  It  is  the 
same  spirit  which  would  have  shown  itself  in  Cuba  had 
we  turned  our  war  of  deliverence  in  that  country,  as 
we  did  in  Asia,  into  one  of  conquest.  Those  who  think 
that  the  Filipinos  continue  to  wage  against  us  the  war 
we  purchased  from  Spain  because  of  some  speech  made 
by  somebody  against  the  treaty  have  read  history  to 
but  little  purpose,  if,  indeed,  they  have  read  it  at  all. 
They  are  inspired  by  that  same  unconquerable  spirit 
which  is  the  noblest  heritage  of  the  human  heart,  which 
I  am  glad  to  believe  is  universal ;  it  is  man's  best  title 
to  freedom,  and  that  is  the  spirit  to  wage  unrelenting 
war  in  behalf  of  liberty. 


THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS 

The  Empire  of  Great  Britain  never  attained  a  loftier 
moral  stature  than  when,  after  Majuba  Hill,  she  showed 
herself  willing  to  do  justice  to  the  Boers.  Standing  almost 
peerless  in  physical  strength  among  the  nations,  she  dis 
played  that  nobler  and  more  essential  quality  of  great 
ness  when  after  a  reverse  she  yet  listened  to  the  demands 
of  that  weak  little  republic  in  South  Africa.  That  act 
of  Gladstone's  strengthened  his  country  in  the  hearts  of 
men  the  world  over;  and  it  will  shine  in  history  all  the 
more  brightly  in  contrast  with  the  brutal  and  merciless 
policy  of  extermination  which  is  now  shocking  the  sen 
sibilities  of  Christendom.  But  how  much  easier  is  it  for 
us  to-day  to  pursue  a  policy  of  justice  ?  We  have  suffered 
no  reverse,  or  none  indeed  unless  it  be  a  moral  one  which 
our  own  conduct  has  inflicted.  The  organized  armies 
have  been  dispersed.  The  Filipino  leader,  whom  we 
bore  to  Luzon  with  arms  in  one  of  our  own  ships,  has 
been  driven  by  us  to  the  caves  of  the  mountains,  if  indeed 
he  yet  lives.  The  time  has  come  when  we  should  frankly 
declare  to  those  people  our  ultimate  purpose  toward 
them.  Let  us  give  them  that  assurance  which  all  our 
history  inspires.  Let  us  tell  them  that  we  will  aid  them 
for  one  year  —  for  five  years  if  need  be  —  in  setting  up 
a  government  of  their  own,  symbolized  by  their  own 
flag,  and  that  we  will  leave  with  them  all  that  is  most 
glorious  in  the  meaning  of  another  flag  —  liberty,  inde 
pendence,  self-government. 

The  annexation  of  Porto  Rico  as  a  result  of 
the  war  with  Spain  was  so  obviously  fitting  and 
so  much  in  accord  with  the  feeling  of  its  inhabit- 

*57 


SAMUEL  W.  MC€ALL 

ants  as  to  occasion  little  dissent,  but  its  relation 
to  the  United  States  after  annexation  and  the 
constitutional  status  of  its  inhabitants  provoked 
wide  discussion.  Mr.  McCall  took  the  view, 
which  still  seems  to  be  in  strict  accordance  with 
every  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  prior  to 
Downes  v.  Bidwell  (1901),  182  U.S.  244,  that 
the  authority  of  Congress  to  legislate  for  Porto 
Rico  and  the  Philippines  was  subject  to  the  re 
straints  of  the  Constitution,  and  that  the  inhab 
itants  of  the  insular  possessions  were  entitled  to 
the  protection  of  the  guaranties  of  that  instrument. 
Mr.  McCall's  speech  on  the  Porto  Rico  tariff,  de 
livered  in  the  House  February  22,  1900,  was  a 
close-knit  constitutional  argument  and  shows 
what  eminence  he  might  have  attained  as  a  con 
stitutional  advocate  had  he  chosen  to  devote  his 
labors  to  the  bar.  Almost  a  year  later  ex-President 
Harrison,  in  what  was  probably  the  ablest  address 
of  his  life,  announced  at  the  University  of  Michi 
gan  the  same  principles  of  constitutional  inter 
pretation  which  formed  the  basis  of  Mr.  McCall's 
speech.  "  The  man  who  has  to  rely  upon  be 
nevolence  for  his  laws  is  a  slave,"  said  Har 
rison.  "The  Revolution," said  Mr.  McCall,  "was 
started  and  fought  to  a  successful  conclusion 
upon  the  broad  principle  that  one  community 
had  no  right  permanently  to  levy  taxes  upon 
158 


THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS 

another  community."  And  a  few  months  later 
in  his  discussion  of  the  Army  Bill,  he  said, 
"There  is  at  least  one  thing  in  government  worse 
than  government  by  revolution,  and  that  is  gov 
ernment  by  brute  force.  The  government  of  one 
community  by  another  community,  of  one  race 
by  another  race,  contrary  to  the  customs  and  ideas 
of  the  governed  is  something  worse  than  govern 
ment  by  revolution." 

Whether  or  not  the  United  States  should  levy 
duties  upon  imports  from  Porto  Rico  was  not, 
in  Mr.  McCall's  view,  simply  a  matter  of  consti 
tutional  power.  "This  is  no  question  of  mere 
syntax/'  he  said.  While  he  believed  that  the 
Constitution  gave  to  Congress  no  power  to  dis 
criminate  between  different  portions  of  American 
territory,  yet,  even  if  it  did,  such  discrimination 
was  to  his  mind  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  American 
liberty.  His  interpretation  of  the  Constitution 
was  rejected  by  the  Supreme  Court,  but  it  is  in 
teresting  to  note  that  the  decision  was  by  a  vote 
of  five  to  four,  and  there  was  great  difference  of 
opinion  among  the  majority  as  to  the  grounds 
of  their  judgment.  This  decision,  however,  did 
not  affect  the  question  of  the  duty  owed  by  the 
United  States  to  the  people  under  its  dominion, 
and  it  may  be  doubted  if  this  whole  debate,  which 
was  the  loftiest  in  tone  which  this  country  has 

159 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

heard  since  the  abolition  of  slavery,  produced 
anything  more  eloquent  than  the  concluding  por 
tion  of  Mr.  McCall's  speech  in  opposition  to  the 
Porto  Rico  tariff:  — 

Remember  that  if  the  race  from  which  our  institu 
tions  sprang  has  great  virtues  it  has  great  faults  as  well. 
It  may  not  be  cruel  like  the  Spanish  race;  but  is  it  free 
from  cupidity  ?  Do  you  want  an  instance  from  its  his 
tory  which  may  show  you  whither  you  are  drifting?  To 
the  west  of  England  there  rises  from  the  sea  an  island 
larger  but  not  more  beautiful  than  Porto  Rico  —  Ireland. 
English  statesmen  thought  their  country  needed  protec 
tion  against  her  products,  and  the  linen  and  other  great 
industries  of  Ireland  were  taxed  and  legislated  almost 
out  of  existence  for  the  benefit  of  the  taxing  country, 
and  the  people  of  Ireland  were  beggared.  That  system 
has  been  abandoned,  and  to-day  a  British  citizen  in  Ire 
land  has  equal  rights  with  a  British  citizen  in  any  other 
part  of  the  Empire,  even  in  England  itself;  but  genera 
tions  will  not  obliterate  the  bitter  memories  of  the  op 
pression  and  wrong  which  rankle  in  the  hearts  of  the 
Irish  people. 

Do  you  want  to  make  Porto  Rico  our  Ireland  ?  I 
say  far  wiser  will  it  be  if,  instead  of  entering  upon 
a  policy  which  will  make  her  happy,  sunny-hearted 
children  the  mere  chattels  of  this  Government,  we 
follow  the  humane  recommendation  of  the  President 
and  lay  the  foundations  of  our  empire  deep  in  the  hearts 
of  those  people.  If  you  will  not  regard  the  question 
from  the  standpoint  of  their  interests,  look  at  it  some- 
160 


THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS 

what  broadly  from  the  standpoint  of  your  own.  Our 
injustice  will  react  upon  ourselves.  [Applause.] 

Our  nation  was  founded  and  has  prospered  upon  the 
doctrine  of  constitutional  liberty.  Do  you  not  see  that 
you  are  degrading  that  liberty  from  a  high  principle?  If 
so,  how  long  can  you  expect  it  to  survive  at  home  ?  We 
restrain  our  own  power  when  it  may  be  exerted  upon 
ourselves.  You  demand  now  that  it  shall  be  absolute 
and  despotic  when  it  may  be  exerted  upon  others.  If 
restraint  is  to  be  removed,  it  can  more  safely  be  dis 
pensed  with  when  they  who  wield  the  power  are  likely 
to  suffer. 

I  do  not  care  to  see  our  flag  emblazon  the  principle 
of  liberty  at  home  and  tyranny  abroad.  Sir,  I  brand  with 
all  my  energy  this  hateful  notion,  bred  somewhere  in  the 
heathenish  recesses  of  Asia,  that  one  man  may  exercise 
absolute  dominion  over  another  man  or  one  nation  over 
another  nation.  That  notion  comports  very  little  with 
my  idea  of  American  liberty.  It  was  resisted  to  the  last 
extremity  by  the  heroes  who  fought  at  Bunker  Hill  and 
starved  at  Valley  Forge.  It  fell  before  the  gleaming 
sabers  of  our  troopers  at  Five  Forks  and  Winchester. 
It  was  shot  to  death  by  our  guns  at  Gettysburg  and 
Appomattox.  A  half-million  men  gave  up  their  lives 
that  their  country  might  stand  forth  clothed  in  the  re 
splendent  robes  of  constitutional  liberty  and  that  we 
might  have  a  government  of  laws  and  not  of  men  for 
every  man  beneath  the  shining  folds  of  the  flag.  All  the 
sweet  voices  of  our  history  plead  with  us  for  that  great 
cause  to-day.  And  I  do  not  believe,  sir,  that  this  nation 
will  tolerate  any  abandonment  of  that  principle  which 

161 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

has   made   her  morally,  as   she  is   physically,  without 
a  peer  among  nations. 

The  status  of  the  Philippines  and  their  relation 
to  the  United  States  were  again  before  Congress 
in  the  winter  of  1905-06,  when  a  bill  providing 
for  free  trade  between  the  United  States  and  the 
Philippines  was  introduced.  It  was  perhaps  not 
surprising  to  find  that  many  men,  who  had  been 
most  strenuous  in  their  advocacy  of  the  annexa 
tion  of  the  islands,  now  opposed  the  removal  of 
tariff  barriers  against  the  coming  of  their  prod 
ucts  to  the  United  States,  on  the  ground  that 
such  a  measure  would  prove  destructive  to  cer 
tain  American  industries.  To  these  men  Mr. 
McCall  said  :  — 

I  think  they  should  manfully  recognize  that  they  are 
simply  going  to  pay  the  price  for  having  indulged  in 
some  beautiful  rhetoric  about  the  flag,  —  how  it  should 
never  be  hauled  down,  no  matter  for  what  purpose  it 
had  been  run  up, —  and  also  for  the  pleasure  of  stand 
ing  upon  the  mount  of  prophecy  and  seeing  dazzling 
visions  of  an  illimitable  trade  destined  never  to  exist. 
They  are  paying  the  penalty  to-day  for  having  contrib 
uted  toward  making  the  Philippine  Islands  American 
territory. 

He   taunted  those   members  who  constantly 
justified  the  subjugation  of  the  Philippines  by  a 
resort  to  "  destiny  "  and  appeals  to  Providence :  — 
162 


THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS 

My  friend  from  Pennsylvania  [Mr.  Dalzell],  who 
is  one  of  the  most  genuine  orators  I  have  ever  listened 
to  upon  this  floor,  in  a  burst  of  piety  and  eloquence 
yesterday  credited  the  providence  of  God  with  the  re 
sponsibility  or  the  glory  for  our  possession  of  the  Phil 
ippine  Archipelago.  This  observation  of  my  friend 
reminded  me  of  a  remark  credited  to  Mr.  Henry  Labou- 
chere  concerning  a  celebrated  British  statesman.  He 
did  not  find  fault,  Mr.  Labouchere  said,  that  that  states 
man  should  now  and  then  be  found  with  an  ace  up  his 
sleeve,  but  he  did  object  when  he  claimed  that  it  was 
put  there  by  Divine  Providence.  [Laughter.]  Horace, 
in  his  "Art  of  Poetry,"  has  said  that  you  should  not 
introduce  a  deity  upon  the  scene  unless  there  were  some 
very  hard  knot  to  untie,  which  it  would  require  a  deity 
to  do,  and  it  seems  to  me  gentlemen  who  have  defended 
our  Philippine  policy  here  have  acted  strictly  within  the 
rule  laid  down  by  Horace.  They  have  a  hard  knot  to 
untie,  and  they  have  frequently  introduced  Providence 
into  this  debate.  It  is  a  convenient  refuge  to  fly  to  when 
one  is  hard  pressed  for  argument. 

Judged  simply  from  an  economic  standpoint, 
Mr.  McCall  thought  that  there  should  be  a  duty 
upon  Philippine  sugar.  If  American  capitalists  in 
troduced  modern  methods  of  sugar  production 
into  the  islands,  the  American  farmer  could  be 
undersold  in  the  American  market.  But  politi 
cal  and  constitutional  considerations  were  more 
mighty  than  economic  arguments.  Having  com 
pelled  the  Filipinos  to  submit  to  American  rule, 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

it  became  the  duty  of  the  American  Government 
to  act  the  part  of  a  faithful  guardian  and  to  do  all 
that  was  possible  to  promote  the  interests  of  its 
ward.  "  The  farmer  is  paying  the  penalty,"  he 
said,  "  because  some  of  our  statesmen  at  a  critical 
time  in  the  history  of  the  nation  saw  fit  to  '  think 
imperially."  Trade  relations  with  the  islands 
should  have  been  considered  when  their  annexa 
tion  was  under  discussion.  It  was  not  now  an 
open  question. 

The  policy  of  free  trade  was  established,  to  my  mind, 
when  we  annexed  the  Philippine  Islands,  and  my  action 
was  determined  for  me  by  others  in  spite  of  my  oppo 
sition  when  annexation  was  decreed,  and  I  feel  con 
strained  to  support  free  trade  as  a  necessary  result  of 
annexation.  It  was  ordained  when  we  bought  from 
Spain  the  bloodiest  foreign  war  in  which  this  Republic 
ever  engaged.  I  say  foreign  war,  because  those  people 
never  owed  us  any  allegiance  whatever,  and  the  war 
was  purely  one  of  conquest  and  subjugation.  It  was  a 
war  aptly  characterized  by  the  fine  line  cited  by  Mr. 
Mead  :  — 

"  Cursed  is  the  war  no  poet  sings." 

Imagine,  if  you  can,  an  American  poet  singing  and 
the  American  schoolboy  declaiming  the  most  glorious 
exploit  of  that  war,  the  capture  of  the  Philippine  chief 
tain  by  American  soldiers  in  Philippine  uniforms  at  the 
very  moment  when  he  was  extending  to  them  succor 
from  impending  starvation. 


THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS 

When  the  Payne  Bill,  which  provided  practi 
cally  for  free  trade  between  the  United  States 
and  the  Philippines,  was  before  the  House,  Mr. 
McCall,  while  advocating  that  provision  of  the 
measure,  also  urged  that  Congress  should  at  the 
same  time  frankly  declare  its  purpose  as  to  the 
ultimate  disposition  of  the  Philippines.  If  Con 
gress  continued  to  encourage  trade  with  the  is 
lands  and  the  investment  of  American  capital 
therein,  the  plea  would  be  made  that  such  invest 
ments  were  entitled  to  the  permanent  protection 
of  the  American  Government.  The  Filipinos 
themselves  foresaw  this  contingency,  and  the 
Filipino  Assembly  was  for  that  reason  opposed 
to  the  policy  of  free  trade  with  the  United  States. 
Mr.  McCall  said:  — 

I  have  noticed  the  manner  in  which  this  bill  has  been 
received  by  the  Philippine  Assembly.  That  is  no  revo 
lutionary  body,  but  it  was  set  up  under  our  auspices. 
So  far  as  this  country  is  concerned,  it  cannot  be  sus 
pected  of  having  an  unfriendly  structure.  And  it  is 
most  significant  of  the  aspiration  of  the  people  of  those 
islands  that,  great  as  the  advantages  of  this  bill  are  to 
them,  their  assembly,  constituted  by  us,  puts  above 
those  great  material  advantages  the  cause  of  the  inde 
pendence  of  their  country.  Believing  that  free  trade 
with  this  country  will  call  into  being  powerful  interests 
hostile  to  their  independence,  they  do  not  wish  to  accept 
the  gift. 

165 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

I  believe  we  should  heed  their  wish  and  couple  this 
grant  with  an  unequivocal  declaration  of  our  ultimate 
policy  which  will  sanctify  every  schedule  of  this  bill  and 
make  it  one  of  the  most  glorious  acts  in  our  history. 
[Applause.] 

There  are  only  three  solutions  which  we  can  avow. 
We  can  declare  that  we  propose  to  hold  them  perpetu 
ally  as  vassals,  passing  their  taxation  laws  at  Washing- 
ington,  and  conceding  them  now  a  little  authority  and 
now,  perhaps,  none  at  all;  or  that  we  will  admit  them 
some  day  as  States  into  the  American  Union  to  take 
part  in  the  common  government;  or  that  we  will  en 
deavor  to  fit  them  for  self-government;  and  when  that 
result  shall  have  been  accomplished  will  permit  them 
to  take  their  place  among  the  free  and  independent  na 
tions.  To  my  mind  the  first  and  second  purposes  are 
inadmissible.  I  have  heard  no  one  seriously  avow  either 
of  them.  Then  why  not,  at  the  same  time  that  we  are 
granting  them  this  extension  of  trade  and  calling  new 
interests  into  being,  why  not  declare  that  it  is  our  pur 
pose  to  fit  them  for  self-government  and  then  to  grant 
them  their  freedom  ?  [Applause.]  Such  a  policy  has 
been,  in  effect,  approved  by  Mr.  Taft  before  he  became 
President  and  by  his  two  predecessors  in  office.  But 
the  treaty  of  Paris  imposes  upon  Congress  the  duty  of 
fixing  the  status  of  the  Philippines.  Then  let  Congress 
at  this  fitting  moment  frankly  declare,  after  ten  years 
of  drifting,  just  what  we  mean  to  do  with  those  people. 
Let  us  make  the  declaration  called  for  by  American 
principles.  Let  us  make  it  no  less  in  their  interests  than 
in  our  own.  [Loud  applause.] 

166 


THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS 

As  this  book  goes  to  press,  Congress  has  under 
discussion  a  bill,  supported  by  both  the  great  par 
ties,  by  which  the  principles  of  the  Declaration  of 
Independence  are  applied  to  the  Philippines  and 
the  policy  advocated  by  Mr.  McCall  ever  since  the 
war  with  Spain  would  be  put  into  effect. 

It  was  the  condition  of  Cuba  which  precipitated 
the  war  with  Spain.  Whatever  sinister  motives 
individuals  may  have  had  with  reference  to  that 
conflict,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  great 
mass  of  the  American  people  were  actuated  by 
broad  motives  of  humanity  and  a  sincere  de 
sire  to  benefit  the  Cuban  people  without  regard 
to  any  direct  benefit  to  ourselves.  It  may  be 
questioned  whether  any  war  was  ever  entered 
upon  in  a  more  disinterested  spirit.  The  resolu 
tion  of  Congress  which  precipitated  hostilities 
declared  that  "the  people  of  the  island  of  Cuba 
are,  and  of  right  ought  to  be,  free  and  independ 
ent,"  and  disclaimed  any  intention  on  the  part 
of  the  United  States  to  exercise  sovereignty,  ju 
risdiction,  or  control  over  the  said  island  except 
for  the  pacification  thereof,  "  and  asserts  its  de 
termination,  when  that  is  accomplished,  to  leave 
the  government  and  control  of  the  island  to  its 
people."  As  the  task  of  restoring  order  in  Cuba 
was  approaching  completion,  Congress  enacted 
the  Platt  Amendment,  by  which  the  acceptance 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

of  certain  safeguards  for  the  maintenance  of  its 
independence  was  imposed  upon  the  Cuban 
Government  as  a  condition  precedent  to  the 
withdrawal  of  the  American  troops. 

But  when  the  authority  of  Spain  had  been  ex 
pelled  from  Cuba  and  a  stable  government  had 
been  established  therein,  Mr.  McCall  argued 
that  the  whole  duty  of  the  United  States  had 
not  yet  been  discharged.  By  the  terms  of  the 
Platt  Amendment,  Cuba's  power  to  make  treaties 
with  other  nations  was  greatly  restricted,  and 
Mr.  McCall  argued  from  this,  as  well  as  from 
other  considerations,  that  Cuba  had  peculiar 
claims  upon  the  generosity  of  the  United  States. 
When  a  bill  establishing  reciprocal  trade  rela 
tions  with  Cuba  was  before  the  House  in  1902, 
it  was  this  aspect  of  the  question  which  Mr. 
McCall  urged  as  the  most  important  reason  for 
its  adoption :  — 

How  does  Cuba's  case  stand  in  equity  compared  with 
that  of  the  Philippines  ?  Cuba  is  at  our  doors.  She 
guards  a  great  stretch  of  our  coast,  the  mouth  of  the 
Mississippi,  and  the  Isthmian  Canal.  It  was  her  cause 
that  stirred  the  hearts  of  the  American  people.  She  is 
a  part  of  us,  not  by  the  harsh  fiat  of  war  which,  in  de 
fiance  of  the  laws  of  nature,  sets  up  an  artificial  and 
unnatural  relation  with  incongruous  peoples  who  live 
under  another  sky  and  who  are  not  so  far  separated 
168 


THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS 

from  us  by  the  space  of  half  the  planet  which  divides  us 
as  by  those  more  ineradicable  differences  in  institutions, 
in  race,  and  in  civilization,  but  she  is  a  part  of  us  by 
those  common  interests  which  bind  peoples  together. 

I  know  it  is  commonly  said  that  destiny  decrees  that 
she  should  some  day  become  an  integral  part  of  the  Amer 
ican  Union.  Destiny  is  too  often  a  mere  synonym  of  un 
hallowed  greed.  For  my  part,  I  prefer  to  have  her  go  on 
and  flourish  as  an  independent  republic  rather  than  to 
have  her  take  a  part  in  the  Government  of  the  people 
of  the  United  States.  Under  the  protection  of  this  na 
tion  in  foreign  affairs,  with  the  instability  of  the  races 
which  inhabit  her,  regulated  and  tempered  by  people  of 
American  birth,  whom  prosperity  will  attract  to  her  in 
large  numbers,  I  think  she  can  flourish  as  an  independ 
ent  government  in  a  way  that  will  make  her  the  model 
of  the  other  Latin-American  States.  But  if  she  is  ever 
to  become  a  part  of  us,  it  is  far  better  that  she  should 
enter  as  a  prosperous  and  contented  member  than 
through  the  door  of  starvation. 

If  we  are  to  have  Porto  Rico  and  Cuba  and  other 
tropical  countries  with  their  incongruous  populations 
admitted  to  participate  in  the  government  of  the  Amer 
ican  commonwealth,  we  must  be  prepared  for  a  radical 
change  in  the  character  of  our  institutions.  For  the 
sake,  then,  of  our  own  future,  as  well  as  for  the  sake 
of  that  newborn  republic,  let  us  pass  this  bill.  What 
ever  the  faults  of  the  Cuban  people,  we  must  all  admit 
the  great  patience  and  serenity  with  which  they  have 
acted  during  the  last  three  years. 

Let  us  now  set  them  upon  their  course  as  a  nation 

169 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

with  the  help  and  the  encouragement  contained  in  this 
measure.  That  little  republic  is  the  child  of  this  great 
nation,  sprung  from  her  loins,  and  she  appeals  to  our 
highest  interests,  to  our  tenderness,  to  our  sense  of  jus 
tice,  and  to  that  high  sentiment  that  makes  men  respond  to 
the  call  of  duty,  and  I  trust  that  such  an  appeal  will  never 
be  made  to  this  Republic  in  vain. 

Mr.  McCall  regarded  the  policy  of  reciproc 
ity  with  Cuba  as  economically  advantageous  to 
the  United  States,  and  as  to  Cuba  he  did  not 
exaggerate  when  he  said  that  to  that  young  and 
weak  people  "it  comes  as  the  very  bread  of  life." 
Every  consideration  of  honor  impelled  us  to  ex 
tend  to  them  the  help  of  which  they  stood  so 
much  in  need.  It  was  this  aspect  of  the  ques 
tion  which  Mr.  McCall  emphasized  in  his  speech 
of  November  19,  1903:  — 

I  have,  perhaps,  said  more  than  is  necessary  concern 
ing  the  financial  features  of  this  measure  in  view  of  the 
clear  sentiment  of  the  House  upon  the  bill.  I  wish  to 
say  a  word  about  those  weightier  considerations  of  a 
high  political  and  moral  character  that  are  based  not 
upon  mere  expediency,  but  that  grow  out  of  the  de 
mands  of  justice.  An  individual  man,  strong  and  rich, 
may  not  with  impunity  oppress  another  who  is  weak 
and  poor,  because  he  is  held  in  terror  by  the  law.  But 
what  court  is  there  which  could  enter  and  enforce  a 
decree  against  the  United  States  in  favor  of  Cuba  ?  Her 
case  therefore  calls  for  the  exercise  of  that  higher  and 
170 


THE  SPANISH  WAR  AND  ITS  PROBLEMS 

more  difficult,  because  merely  voluntary,  justice  which 
a  strong  nation  measures  out  to  a  weak  one. 

Cuba  is  not  strong  enough  physically  to  enforce  any 
claim  against  the  United  States.  She  has  no  army  or 
navy.  She  is  just  entering  upon  her  career  as  a  na 
tion.  She  is  absolutely  in  the  hollow  of  our  hands,  so 
that  whatever  we  do  for  her  will  not  be  done  by  us  out 
of  fear,  but  will  come  about  by  the  operation  upon  our 
will  of  the  abstract  principles  of  justice.  Cuba  has 
already  done  something  at  our  dictation.  She  has  sur 
rendered  to  us  important  naval  stations  upon  her  south 
ern  coast,  and  surrendered  them  at  our  demand.  She 
has  also  imposed  very  serious  limitations  upon  her 
power  to  treat  with  other  nations,  and  she  has  done  this 
upon  our  demand. 

We  have  put  Cuba  in  a  position  where  she  can  safely 
make  no  trade  compact  with  any  other  nation  than  our 
selves.  We  have  resting  upon  us  the  obligations  of  a 
mother  to  a  daughter.  Her  government  has  been  reared 
upon  soil  soaked  by  the  blood  of  our  soldiers,  and  it  ex 
ists  because  of  the  battles  that  have  been  fought  by 
Americans  upon  her  territory  and  upon  the  seas  that 
surround  her  and  on  the  other  side  of  the  world.  She 
guards  the  approach  to  the  isthmian  canal  and  the 
mouth  of  the  Mississippi.  Her  peace  and  happiness  are 
most  important  to  us.  Her  prosperity  will  conduce  to 
our  repose  as  well  as  our  renown,  and  the  members  of 
this  House  have  an  opportunity  to-day  to  add  appre 
ciably  to  the  glory  and  to  serve  the  honor  of  their 
country  by  voting  for  this  bill  with  substantial  una 
nimity.  [Loud  applause  on  the  Republican  side.] 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE    PRESIDENCY    OF    DARTMOUTH    COLLEGE 

HOWEVER  busy  Mr.  McCall's  life  has 
been  and  however  much  his  public  duties 
have  taken  him  away  from  New  England,  noth 
ing  has  ever  diminished  his  interest  in  his  alma 
mater.  Ever  since  his  graduation  from  Dart 
mouth  in  1874,  he  has  kept  in  close  touch  with 
her  affairs,  and  as  his  reputation  grew  he  has  been 
the  recipient  of  her  highest  academic  honors.  He 
has  been  her  chosen  spokesman  upon  such  festi 
val  occasions  as  the  centennial  of  the  graduation 
of  Daniel  Webster.  He  has  been  her  trusted 
counselor  in  many  a  difficult  situation.  It  was  but 
natural,  therefore,  that  when  the  presidency  of 
the  college  became  vacant  in  1908,  the  thoughts 
of  Dartmouth  men  turned  to  Mr.  McCall. 

The  history  of  Dartmouth  is  in  many  respects 
unique.  Founded  as  a  school  for  Indians  and 
isolated  in  a  mountain  village  remote  from  any 
considerable  city,  there  was  little  in  her  origin  or 
environment  which  promised  the  development  of 
an  influential  institution  of  learning.  Several  cir 
cumstances,  however,  combined  to  make  her  well 
172 


PRESIDENCY  OF  DARTMOUTH  COLLEGE 

known.  Several  of  her  alumni,  such  as  Daniel 
Webster  and  Rufus  Choate,  Thaddeus  Stevens 
and  Salmon  P.  Chase,  kept  her  much  in  the  public 
eye.  She  had  been  the  subject  also  of  one  of  the 
most  famous  legal  controversies  ever  heard  in 
American  courts,  and  Daniel  Webster's  well- 
known  phrase,  uttered  in  the  course  of  his  argu 
ment  in  her  behalf,  "  It  is,  Sir,  as  I  have  said,  a 
small  college.  And  yet,  there  are  those  who  love 
it,"  was  a  part  of  the  rhetorical  equipment  of 
many  an  American  schoolboy.  Like  much  other 
rhetoric,  however,  it  was  misleading.  The  truth 
is  that  even  when  Webster  made  the  statement, 
Dartmouth,  as  compared  with  her  contempo 
raries,  was  not  a  small  college.  While  her  situa 
tion  was  in  some  respects  unfavorable  to  rapid 
growth,  she  was  for  many  years  the  only  college 
in  Maine,  New  Hampshire,  and  Vermont.  In  the 
eighteenth  century  those  sections  of  New  Eng 
land  were  rapidly  settled  with  a  population  of 
character  and  enterprise  and  ability,  and  the 
sons  of  these  pioneers  flocked  to  Dartmouth  in 
considerable  numbers.  It  is  true  that  measured 
by  the  standards  of  the  present  day,  when  our 
great  universities  number  their  students  by  thou 
sands,  the  Dartmouth  of  Webster's  day  would 
fittingly  be  described  as  a  small  college.  But  when 
we  remember  that  from  1790  to  about  1850  the 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

institution  of  which  Webster  spoke  was  in  point 
of  attendance  sometimes  second  and  much  of  the 
time  third  among  American  institutions  of  learn 
ing,  it  can  be  seen  how  misleading  his  statement 
was.  History,  however,  is  too  prosaic  to  compete 
with  the  genius  of  the  orator.  "  Eagle  wings  "  are 
not  only  the  means  by  which,  as  Juvenal  says, 
"  immortal  scandals  fly/'  but  they  bear  anything 
which  can  be  compacted  into  a  convincing  phrase. 
The  Dartmouth  of  Webster's  day  will  continue  to 
be  thought  of  as  a  small  college.  Mr.  McCall  has 
finely  said  in  his  oration  on  Webster:  — 

Whatever  may  have  been  its  relative  rank,  the  one 
thing  most  certainly  known  about  it  now  is  that  it  was 
a  small  college.  The  pathetic  statement  of  Webster  in 
the  argument  of  its  cause  at  the  bar  of  the  Supreme 
Court  has  settled  that  fact  for  all  time.  It  is  true  that 
it  was  a  day  of  small  things,  but  the  smallness  of  con 
temporary  objects  was  not  immortalized  by  the  touch 
of  genius,  which  has  it  in  its  power  to  endow  with  per 
petual  life  any  passing  condition  or  mood  in  the  life  of 
a  man  or  an  institution.  Fifty  generations  have  grown  old 
and  died  since  the  Greek  artist  carved  his  marble  urn,  but 
the  maiden  and  her  lover  chiseled  there  are  still  young, 
and  to  the  immortality  conferred  by  art  has  been  added 
the  immortality  of  poetry  in  the  noble  verse  of  Keats  :  — 
"  Forever  wilt  thou  love  and  she  be  fair." 

Even  the  most  cursory  account  of  Dartmouth 
should   mention   her  noteworthy  record  in  the 


PRESIDENCY  OF  DARTMOUTH  COLLEGE 

Civil  War.  In  1861  she  had  only  2753  living 
alumni,  many  of  whom  were  too  old  for  military 
service.  Yet  from  this  small  band  and  from  the 
undergraduates  then  in  attendance  she  contrib 
uted  652  men  to  the  armies  that  fought  for  the 
Union,  —  a  larger  proportion  of  her  sons  than 
was  contributed  by  any  other  college  in  the 
North. 

When  President  Tucker  became  the  head  of 
Dartmouth  in  1893,  she  was  still  a  typical  old 
New  England  college,  doing  excellent  work  upon 
ancient  lines,  but  not  much  concerned  with  new 
and  progressive  ideas  in  education.  The  expan 
sion  in  every  field  so  characteristic  of  the  univer 
sities  situated  near  great  cities  had  not  yet  pene 
trated  to  the  country  college.  It  is  due  chiefly 
to  President  Tucker  that  Dartmouth  is  no  longer 
apologetically  described  as  a  small  college.  But 
even  more  marked  than  its  extraordinary  growth 
in  attendance  has  been  its  growth  in  all  those 
things  which  indicate  a  great  scholastic  center. 
Removed  though  she  is  from  the  large  cities, 
she  has  nevertheless  attracted  scholars  to  her 
faculty,  books  to  her  library,  and  apparatus  to 
her  laboratories  in  such  goodly  measure  that  the 
little  academy  established  in  the  mountains  by 
a  missionary  clergyman  as  a  center  of  light  to 
Indians  has  become  an  institution  of  the  first 

I7S 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

importance  in  the  educational  life  of  the  entire 
country. 

When  the  health  of  President  Tucker  com 
pelled  him  to  resign,  leading  members  of  the 
board  of  trustees  urged  Mr.  McCall  to  allow 
them  to  present  his  name  to  the  board  as  Presi 
dent  Tucker's  successor.  This  suggestion,  which 
was  never  made  public,  came  to  Mr.  McCall  as 
a  great  surprise.  He  said  while  he  was  deliberat 
ing  upon  it  that  it  was  entirely  different  from  any 
thing  that  he  had  ever  thought  of  for  himself.  He 
was  strongly  tempted  to  accept  it.  It  was  another 
opportunity  to  serve  his  alma  mater  and  such  op 
portunities  always  appealed  to  him.  It  was  also  in 
line  with  his  scholarly  tastes.  It  would  bring  him 
into  contact  with  the  life  of  youth  with  which  he 
feels  so  strongly  in  sympathy.  Ultimately,  how 
ever,  he  urged  his  friends  among  the  trustees  to 
turn  elsewhere  for  a  president  and  to  give  him 
no  further  consideration.  But  the  feeling  of  the 
board  that  he  was  the  proper  successor  to  Presi 
dent  Tucker  was  shared  by  the  college  faculty 
and  by  the  alumni  of  the  college  throughout  the 
country.  A  few  months  later,  therefore,  the  ques 
tion  was  again  brought  up,  with  much  insistence. 
Through  an  accident  the  desire  of  the  trustees 
became  known  and  there  was  then  a  general  public 
discussion.  Dartmouth  men  everywhere  began  to 


PRESIDENCY  OF  DARTMOUTH  COLLEGE 

urge  Mr.  McCall  to  accept.  Forty-three  mem 
bers  of  the  Dartmouth  faculty  united  in  address 
ing  to  him  the  following  letter :  — 

We,  the  undersigned  members  of  the  faculty  of  Dart 
mouth  College,  having  learned  that  you  have  under  con 
sideration  the  presidency  of  this  institution,  take  this 
opportunity  of  expressing  to  you  our  sincere  hope  that 
you  may  accept  the  tender  made  you.  While  we  recog 
nize  the  many  sacrifices  which  would  be  entailed  by 
leaving  your  present  field  of  civic  usefulness,  we  feel  that 
we  are  not  going  beyond  the  limits  of  propriety  in  urg 
ing  you  to  accept  the  position  upon  the  grounds  of  public 
duties  and  of  devotion  to  the  interests  of  this  institution. 
In  the  confident  belief  that  under  your  guidance  Dart 
mouth  College  will  not  only  hold  its  present  enviable 
position,  but  will  extend  its  influence  nationally,  we 
pledge  you  our  cordial  support  and  cooperation. 

This  collective  letter  from  the  faculty  was  sup 
ported  by  individual  letters  from  many  of  its 
members.  President  Tucker,  who  was  in  hearty 
sympathy  with  the  action  of  the  trustees,  wrote : 

I  cannot  refrain  from  saying,  in  a  personal  way,  how 
much  I  feel  that  the  future  of  the  college  depends  upon 
your  decision.  Of  course  institutions  live,  even  under 
adverse  conditions,  but  the  difference  between  living 
under  ordinary  and  under  unusual  conditions  of  a  favor 
able  sort  is  very  great.  I  can  think  of  nothing  which 
would  put  so  much  heart  and  enthusiasm  into  Dart 
mouth  men  all  over  the  country,  or  give  to  the  college 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

such  an  assured  position  for  the  coming  years,  as  your 
acceptance  of  the  presidency. 

Probably  no  communication  from  the  faculty 
gave  Mr.  McCall  greater  satisfaction  than  this 
from  one  of  his  former  teachers  :  — 

I  shall  esteem  it  a  pleasure  to  work  under  one  whom 
I  remember  so  satisfactorily  as  a  student  and  of  whom  I 
have  known  so  honorably  as  a  public  man.  From  the 
side  of  the  faculty  I  therefore  add  my  urgency  to  that 
of  the  trustees. 

The  alumni,  of  course,  manifested  the  greatest 
interest  in  the  election,  and  from  every  side  came 
urgent  requests  that  he  should  accept  the  posi 
tion.  One  of  the  most  noted  religious  leaders  of 
the  country  wrote :  - 

I  want  to  tell  you,  as  an  old  Dartmouth  contemporary, 
how  for  many  reasons  it  would  please  me  should  you 
accept  the  position.  ...  I  feel  sure  that  under  your 
administration,  Dartmouth  would  hold  on  to  all  that  is 
best  in  the  past,  and  would  not  forget  its  noble  moral 
and  religious  traditions,  or  its  great  founder  who  was 
such  a  noted  evangelist  as  well  as  educator. 

A  letter  which  preserves  much  of  the  tang  of 
college  camaraderie  is  the  following :  — 

My  dear  Sam  :  — 

I  want  to  say  to  you  that  all  the  Dartmouth  gang 
who  have  been  active  in  her  affairs  in  the  last  fifteen 
years,  with  whom  I  have  talked,  hope  you  can  see  your 

178 


PRESIDENCY  OF  DARTMOUTH  COLLEGE 

way  clear  to  accept  the  presidency  of  Dartmouth  Col 
lege.  To  be  sure,  this  gang  is  getting  older  than  it  used 
to  be,  as  you  and  I  both  realize,  but  I  believe  the  senti 
ment  among  the  younger  crowd  that  is  coming  on  to 
take  our  places  is  just  the  same,  and  I  believe  that  you 
will  have  as  loyal  alumni  back  of  you  as  Tucker  has 
always  had  since  his  accession  to  the  presidency.  We 
shall  all  feel  greatly  relieved  and  delighted  to  hear  that 
you  have  concluded  to  accept. 

Another  alumnus  who  had  served  in  Congress 
said  in  urging  his  acceptance:  — 

I  regard  the  position  of  the  head  of  Dartmouth  as  far 
more  important  and  more  useful  than  that  of  a  Congress 
man.  I  appreciate,  however,  that  I  do  not  have  that 
exalted  view  of  the  position  of  Congressman  that  I  en 
tertained  before  I  went  to  Washington. 

Interest  in  Mr.  McCall's  decision  was  by  no 
means  confined  to  the  immediate  Dartmouth 
circle.  One  of  the  most  eminent  citizens  of  Bos 
ton,  the  Honorable  Richard  Olney,  himself  an 
alumnus  of  Brown,  wrote  thus  :  — 

Unless  you  are  going  to  be  President  of  the  United 
States,  I  trust  you  will  see  your  way  to  become  presi 
dent  of  the  college  of  which  Daniel  Webster  and  Rufus 
Choate  were  graduates.  ...  I  have,  of  course,  no  ad 
vice  to  give  upon  the  subject,  the  matter  being  so  pecu 
liarly  of  a  personal  nature.  But  I  am  sure  that  you  would 
fill  the  chair  of  the  president  entirely  full  to  the  great 

179 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

benefit  of  Dartmouth  and  with  a  success  which  would 
enhance  even  the  large  reputation  you  now  enjoy. 

A  letter  of  peculiar  interest  came  from  Major 
Henry  L.  Higginson  :  — 

Dear  Mr.  Me  Call :  — 

In  any  event  you  have  done  your  work  like  a  high- 
minded  man  and  public  servant  and  we  are  very  grateful 
to  you.  Dartmouth  is  doing  an  excellent  part  in  our 
country,  and  has  had  a  noble  president.  If  it  really  gets 
you,  it  will  be  in  luck  —  and  you  will  have  a  dignified 
and  interesting  task  so  long  as  you  wish.  I  know  that 
the  matter  is  not  settled  —  and  I  am  sorry  to  miss 
you  from  Washington  and  glad  to  see  you  —  at  peace. 
Education  !  It  is  our  great  need.  Pray  don't  reply, 
but  tie  up  your  words  in  peace,  and  be  ready  to  come 
home. 

Most  of  Mr.  McCall's  correspondents  as 
sumed  that  his  acceptance  of  the  presidency  would 
involve  his  permanent  retirement  from  political 
life,  but  suggestions  were  not  wanting  that  by  be 
coming  a  resident  of  Hanover  he  made  himself 
eligible  to  election  to  the  United  States  Senate 
from  the  State  of  New  Hampshire,  and  the  pros 
pect  of  such  an  event  was  held  out  as  a  definite 
reason  for  his  acceding  to  the  invitation  from 
Dartmouth. 

No  one  questioned  Mr.  McCall's  eminent  fit 
ness  for  the  presidency,  but  many  of  his  friends 
180 


PRESIDENCY  OF  DARTMOUTH  COLLEGE 

urged  that  it  was  his  paramount  duty  to  retain 
his  place  in  Congress.  Numerous  letters  from  his 
constituents  indicated  their  desire  that  he  should 
continue  to  represent  them.  An  organization  of 
colored  men  in  Boston  expressed  much  concern 
because  of  his  prospective  retirement.  "  We  are 
in  doubt,"  they  wrote,  "  as  to  how  well  we  will 
fare  during  the  coming  administration,  and  view 
with  alarm  the  prospect  of  losing  so  good  and 
influential  a  friend  as  you  in  Congress." 

A  distinguished  historian,  James  Ford  Rhodes, 
wrote,  as  spokesman  for  a  group  of  well-known 
men  :  — 

Dear  Me  Call:  — 

On  last  Tuesday  at  the  Wintersnight  Club  dinner, 
dining  with  Dr.  J.  C.  Warren  on  Beacon  Street,  the 
question  came  up  about  the  offer  of  Dartmouth  Col 
lege  to  you,  and  the  opinion  was  generally  expressed 
that,  while  you  would  make  an  excellent  president  of  a 
college,  we  should  all  regret  your  acceptance  of  the  flat 
tering  offer;  because  you  were  peculiarly  situated  to  ex 
ercise  a  salutary  influence  in  the  House,  and,  having  a 
sure  district  and  devoted  constituency,  it  would  be  a 
misfortune  for  the  State  and  nation  for  you  to  forsake 
them  for  a  position  which  you  would  bring  more  to  than 
it  could  give  to  you.  You  have  made  a  good  record, 
have  a  standing  and  acquaintance  that  is  valuable  for  the 
country  ;  and  they  must  be  agreeable  to  yourself.  Tal 
ent  like  yours  should  not  be  buried  at  Hanover  when  it 

181 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

may  be  exercised  in  the  larger  field  of  Massachusetts 
and  on  the  theater  of  Washington. 

There  were  eight  of  us  dining  ;  J.  C.  Warren,  James 
Crafts,  Judge  Grant,  Moorfield  Storey,  James  Storrow, 
Charles  Sargent,  Edmund  Wheelwright,  and  myself. 
As  I  understand  it  the  sentiment  was  unanimous  and  I 
was  asked  to  report  the  same  to  you. 

One  of  the  foremost  lawyers  in  the  United 
States,  the  Honorable  Moorfield  Storey,  put 
the  case  thus:  — 

I  hope  you  will  not  accept  the  presidency  of  Dart 
mouth  College.  You  have  won  for  yourself  a  position  of 
very  great  influence  and  power  in  the  nation,  and  all 
your  experience  tends  to  make  your  influence  in  the 
future  greater.  The  problems  that  we  are  called  upon 
to  deal  with  in  the  near  future  are  such  as  require  the 
very  best  men  we  can  get,  and  there  is  no  one  who  can 
step  into  your  place  if  you  leave  it.  Any  one,  whatever 
his  ability,  would  have  to  demonstrate  it  to  the  country, 
would  have  to  spend  years  in  showing  what  he  was  ca 
pable  of  before  he  could  acquire  such  a  power  for  good 
as  you  now  have. 

The  New  York  "Sun"  commented  on  the 
subject  in  this  wise:  — 

During  this  now  closing  seven  or  eight  years'  war 
upon  the  Constitution,  the  courts,  property,  and  common 
sense,  Mr.  McCall  has  kept  his  head.  He  must  have 
been  pretty  lonely  a  good  deal  of  the  time.  If  calmer 
days  are  hoped  for,  still  the  public  mind,  the  new  ad- 
182 


PRESIDENCY  OF  DARTMOUTH  COLLEGE 

ministration,  the  Congress  must  long  feel  the  effects  of 
the  debauch  of  violent  personal  government  which  the 
country  has  undergone.  The  clear  intellect  and  courage 
of  Mr.  McCall  cannot  well  be  spared  from  Washing 
ton;  and  it  is  to  the  honor  of  his  congressional  district, 
the  "  Harvard  College  district,"  that  in  spite  of  con 
tinual  hopes  and  efforts  of  cheap  little  Republican  poli 
ticians,  he  can  be  reflected  as  long  as  he  pleases.  If 
the  college  of  Webster  and  Choate  is  fortunate  enough 
to  lure  from  Washington  to  Hanover  this  worthy  per- 
petuator  of  its  best  traditions,  Dartmouth  gets  a  singu 
larly  able  man  of  affairs  and  the  House  of  Representa 
tives  loses  its  most  intellectual  and  engaging  figure. 

After  a  full  consideration  of  the  factors  in 
volved,  Mr.  McCall  finally  decided  to  remain  in 
Congress.  The  reasons  which  actuated  him  are 
fully  set  forth  in  the  following  communication 
to  the  Dartmouth  Trustees:  — 

WASHINGTON,  D.C.,  Feb.  22,  1909. 

Gen.  Frank  S.  Streeter,  Chairman  of  Committee  of  Trustees 

of  Dartmouth  College,  Concord,  N.H. 
My  Dear  Gen.  Streeter:  While  I  expressed  to  you 
my  impression  when  you  first  mentioned  to  me  the  sub 
ject  of  the  presidency  of  the  college,  yet  its  very  great 
importance,  the  impressive  manner  in  which  it  was  pre 
sented,  and  the  widespread  interest  in  the  decision,  as 
shown  in  the  many  letters  I  have  received  from  gradu 
ates  of  the  college  and  from  others  imposed  upon  me 
the  duty  of  giving  the  matter  my  most  serious  thought. 

183 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

That  duty  I  have  made  a  sincere  effort  to  perform,  and, 
whether  right  or  wrong,  I  have  reached  a  conclusion. 

If  I  had  never  been  at  all  connected  with  the  college, 
I  must  yet  have  been  stirred  at  the  suggestion  you  have 
made  me.  There  could  be  no  greater  distinction  than  to 
be  thought  of  to  lead  one  of  the  great  intellectual  armies 
of  the  country,  to  be  associated  with  so  noble  a  past 
and  with  such  a  splendid  present  in  which  the  old  and 
new  are  so  richly  blended.  But  I  had  long  known  the 
wonderful  charm  of  Hanover,  so  beautifully  seated 
among  the  hills  and  so  completely  dominated  by  the 
college  spirit  as  to  make  it,  one  might  fairly  say,  the 
most  characteristic  college  town  in  America.  No  one 
could  be  more  sensible  than  myself  of  both  the  attract 
iveness  and  the  distinction  of  the  proposal,  the  value  of 
which  was  enhanced  by  the  fact  that  I  had  been  thought 
of  by  a  board  of  trustees  who  personally  knew  me  and 
containing  among  its  members  two  of  my  classmates 
with  whom  I  had  been  bound  by  ties  of  intimacy  since 
we  were  boys  together  at  Hanover. 

The  chief  work  of  my  life  has  been  only  in  the  most 
general  way  related  to  education.  One's  habits  of  thought 
tend  to  become  fixed  and  more  or  less  adapted  to  the 
pursuit  he  is  engaged  in,  and  he  should  hesitate  before 
transplanting  himself  to  a  new  field.  The  difference  in 
the  work  I  have  been  doing  and  that  you  propose  may 
not  really  be  one  of  kind,  and  I  should  not  wish  upon 
that  point  to  set  my  opinion  against  your  own  and  that 
of  President  Tucker,  who  is  a  master  in  his  calling  and 
is  giving  an  administration  in  brilliancy  conspicuous  in 
the  history  of  colleges.  And  to  decide  upon  that  ground, 

184 


PRESIDENCY  OF  DARTMOUTH  COLLEGE 

too,  would  be  merely  to  take  the  view  of  caution  and 
conservatism,  something  scarcely  to  be  thought  of  when 
there  is  an  influence  more  positive  operating  upon  my 
mind. 

The  work  which  I  am  trying  to  do  was  not  entered 
upon  by  accident,  and  if  I  have  not  pursued  it  with  suc 
cess  it  at  least  is  not  because  my  vows  were  lightly 
taken.  And  since  I  did  not  lightly  take  it  up,  I  cannot, 
in  what  I  believe  to  be  a  very  grave  crisis,  drop  it  easily 
and  shift  to  something  else.  I  may  be  accomplishing 
little  of  value,  but  I  happen  to  be  on  the  battle-line, 
and  I  should,  indeed,  be  a  sorry  soldier  nicely  to  weigh 
causes  and  to  decide  at  this  moment  to  step  out  of  the 
ranks.  This  is  not  the  place  for  political  discourse,  but 
perhaps  I  should  say  to  you  that  the  crisis  I  referred  to 
is  in  my  opinion  full  of  peril  to  ou.r  institutions,  and 
how  soon  the  movement  is  to  begin  toward  sanity  and 
safety  I  do  not  know.  I  am  far  less  concerned  by  par 
ticular  theories  than  by  general  methods  of  government 
—  methods  which  have  been  carrying  us  swiftly  toward 
a  condition  under  which  limitation  upon  governmental 
power  would  be  done  away  with,  and  the  favoritism  and 
caprice  of  an  autocrat  would  take  the  place  of  consti 
tutional  restraint.  And  some  chance  barbarian  as  an  auto 
crat  might  overturn  our  temples  and  do  more  harm  in 
the  direction  of  uncivilizing  the  country  than  all  our 
colleges  together  could  possibly  repair. 

It  may  be  that  I  have  an  exaggerated  notion  of  the 
relative  importance  of  my  present  work,  but  if  so,  the 
teachings  I  received  at  "the  college  on  the  hill"  must 
bear  a  part  of  the  responsibility.  Her  traditions  are  vital 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

and  throbbing  with  inspiration  to  public  service.  I  need 
only  mention  to  you  the  supreme  causes  of  constitutional 
government  and  the  preservation  of  the  Union.  With 
both  of  those  causes  her  name  is  imperishably  identified. 

I  have  decided,  therefore,  to  continue  in  the  service 
of  the  most  tolerant  and  generous  of  all  constituencies, 
which  has  just  honored  me  by  a  reelection  to  Congress, 
and  accordingly,  I  ask  that  you  do  not  consider  my 
name  when  the  time  comes  to  choose  a  president. 

In  conclusion,  let  me  say  that  I  should  deem  myself 
a  quite  unworthy  son  of  Dartmouth  to  deny  her  any 
thing  that  would  help  her  and  that  she  might  fairly  ask; 
but  I  cannot  but  think  my  decision  the  wiser  one,  even 
for  her.  She  has  sons  highly  fitted  for  her  service,  skilled 
in  administration,  with  a  special  training  and  scholar 
ship  to  which  I  can  lay  no  claim,  and  under  some  one 
of  them  she  will  continue  to  grow  and  prosper.  Planted 
even  before  the  nation  was  born,  she  has  been  through 
every  crisis  of  our  history,  has  had  her  own  special  stress 
of  storm  and  has  emerged  from  every  trial  more  lovely 
and  more  strong,  until  to-day  she  is  confronted  with  no 
grave  problems,  unless  with  such  as  prosperity  often 
imposes.  Those  problems,  whatever  they  may  be,  will 
trouble  her  but  little  when  she  comes  to  face  them,  as  she 
surely  will,  her  heart  rilled  with  the  great  memories  of  her 
past  and  her  fair  eyes  looking  hopefully  upon  the  future. 
Sincerely  yours, 

S.  W.  McCALL. 

Mr.  McCall's   decision   and   particularly   the 
terms  in  which  it  was  announced  evoked  a  chorus 
1 86 


PRESIDENCY  OF  DARTMOUTH  COLLEGE 

of  approval.  One  of  the  most  honored  of  his 
constituents,  Colonel  Thomas  Wentworth  Hig- 
ginson,  wrote:  — 

Allow  one  of  the  oldest  in  years  and  one  of  the  most 
cordial  of  your  supporters  to  thank  you  for  keeping  u  in 
the  battle-line."  My  Wentworth  alliance  would  have 
justly  given  me  associations  with  Dartmouth,  so  that  I 
can  look  at  that  side  also. 

A  resident  of  another  congressional  district  in 
Massachusetts  expressed  his  satisfaction  in  these 
words :  — 

If  it  is  permitted  a  graduate  of  Brown  and  a  voter  in 
the  eleventh  Congressional  District  to  express  any  opin 
ion  as  to  matters  relating  to  Dartmouth  and  the  eighth 
Congressional  District,  allow  me  to  thank  you  for  your 
declination  of  the  Dartmouth  presidency.  I  am  very 
glad,  indeed,  that  you  are  to  continue  in  Congress  and 
your  decision  will  be  gratifying  to  many  of  us  Demo 
crats.  Some  of  your  party  colleagues  might  consider 
this  a  doubtful  compliment,  but  I  trust  you  will  not  find 
it  offensive. 

Interest  in  Mr.  McCall's  decision  was  not  con 
fined  to  this  country.  From  Toronto,  one  of  the 
most  eminent  of  British  scholars  and  publicists, 
Goldwin  Smith,  wrote:  — 

It  is  with  real  delight  that  I  see  you  have  decided  in 
favour  of  Washington  against  Dartmouth.  With  all 
due  respect  to  Dartmouth,  there  be  nothing  to  be  done 
there  at  all  comparable  in  importance  to  the  removal 

187 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

of  the  barriers  of  trade  between  the  two  sections  of  this 
continent,  bringing  as  that  measure  will  social  and  po 
litical  advantages  in  its  train. 

The  following  letter  from  one  of  his  constitu 
ents  well  summarizes  the  whole  correspondence: 

Your  letter  to  the  Dartmouth  Trustees  causes  much 
rejoicing  in  this  bailiwick.  The  Eighth  District  has 
realized  for  a  long  time  that  it  was  represented  by  the 
sanest  man  in  either  house,  and  it  is  glad  to  know  that 
it  is  not  to  be  deprived  of  that  distinction.  The  coun 
try  at  large  is  to  be  congratulated  on  your  decision.  It 
is  a  much  easier  matter  for  Dartmouth  to  find  a  satis 
factory  president  than  it  would  be  for  the  country  to  find 
another  man  who  would  stand  for  the  things  that  you 
stand  for  in  Congress.  I  am  glad,  however,  that  the 
presidency  was  offered  you,  not  only  because  it  was  a 
compliment  which  was  richly  deserved,  but  also  because 
of  the  noble  reply  which  it  called  forth.  Your  letter  to 
the  trustees  was  one  of  the  most  uplifting  documents 
which  any  public  man  in  our  history  has  sent  out,  and 
I  am  sure  the  country  will  recognize  it  as  such  and  that 
your  influence  on  public  affairs  will  be  correspondingly 
increased. 

These  are  but  a  few  extracts  from  the  letters, 
more  than  two  hundred  in  number,  which  came 
to  Mr.  McCall  from  all  parts  of  the  country,  and 
which  are  convincing  evidence  of  the  widespread 
interest  in  his  decision  and  of  the  place  which  he 
occupied  in  American  public  life. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE    MAN    OF    LETTERS 

AMERICAN  public  life  has  often  been  unfa 
vorably  contrasted  with  that  of  other  coun 
tries,  particularly  Great  Britain,  because  it  has  at 
tracted  so  few  men  of  eminence  in  letters  and 
science.  It  is  true  that  the  roll  of  the  British  Par 
liament  contains  many  names  which  confer  luster 
on  the  oldest  of  legislatures  because  of  attainments 
outside  the  field  of  politics.  Lord  Bryce  and  Lord 
Morley,  Lord  Curzon  and  Lord  Rosebery,  Ar 
thur  Balfour,  Augustine  Birrell,  and  Sir  Gilbert 
Parker  are  examples  of  a  class  of  men  who  have 
long  been  conspicuous  in  British  public  life.  But 
in  America  similar  examples,  if  not  so  numerous, 
have  not  been  altogether  lacking.  The  beginnings 
of  our  existence  as  a  nation  are  indelibly  associ 
ated  with  Benjamin  Franklin,  who  was  not  only 
our  leading  man  of  letters  in  his  day,  but  is  one 
of  the  chief  figures  in  the  history  of  science.  Since 
his  time,  Bancroft  and  Irving,  Motley  and  White, 
Lowell  and  Hay  have  all  been  members  of  our 
diplomatic  service.  But  a  few  years  ago,  with 
Mr.  Roosevelt  in  the  Presidency,  Mr.  Hay  in 

189 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

the  State  Department,  Mr.  Lodge  in  the  Senate, 
and  Mr.  McCall  in  the  House,  we  had  a  group 
in  our  public  councils  which  in  point  of  literary 
achievement  could  well  be  compared  with  any 
similar  group  in  the  public  service  of  any  other 
country.  Had  Mr.  McCall  not  given  his  life  to 
statesmanship,  he  would  undoubtedly  have  de 
voted  it  to  letters.  While  the  public  life  of  the 
country  has  been  enriched  by  his  career,  Ameri 
can  literature  has  been  deprived  of  a  great  histo 
rian  and  essayist.  To  a  considerable  extent,  to 
be  sure,  he  has  combined  literature  and  politics, 
but  it  is  obvious  that  the  time  and  energy  which 
his  public  duties  consumed  made  impossible  those 
literary  productions  which  it  would  otherwise  have 
been  reasonable  to  expect  from  him.  For  such 
contributions  he  is  rarely  equipped.  His  wide 
acquaintance  with  the  masterpieces  of  Greek  and 
Roman  and  English  literature,  his  sound  schol 
arship,  his  grace  of  expression,  and  his  gift  of 
imagination  constitute  a  combination  of  qualities 
which  admirably  fit  him  for  a  high  place  in 
American  letters. 

As  civilization  in  the  United  States  has  moved 
westward  and  as  new  States  have  developed,  the 
epoch  of  transition  from  frontier  conditions  to 
communities  of  a  more  settled  and  complex  type 
has  been  marked  in  several  instances  by  the 
190 


THE  MAN  OF  LETTERS 

appearance  of  names  which  hold  places  of  dis 
tinction  in  the  literature  of  the  country.  Their 
nearness  to  nature  and  the  simplicity  of  their 
surroundings  may  have  assisted  in  the  develop 
ment  of  a  sympathy  with  the  primitive  and  an 
understanding  of  the  human  spirit  which  might 
not  have  fared  so  well  in  the  older  and  more 
sophisticated  communities.  At  any  rate,  it  was 
in  surroundings  of  this  sort  that  were  spent  the 
formative  years  of  such  writers  as  William  Dean 
Howells  and  Whitelaw  Reid  in  Ohio,  Edward 
Eggleston  in  Indiana,  John  Hay  in  Illinois,  Mark 
Twain  in  Missouri,  and  Bret  Harte  and  Joaquin 
Miller  in  California.  And  it  was  in  a  region  that 
was  just  passing  out  of  the  frontier  stage  that 
Mr.  McCall  spent  his  boyhood,  and  the  strong 
human  sympathies,  as  well  as  the  feeling  for 
liberty  and  the  varying  moods  of  nature  which 
characterizes  much  of  what  he  has  spoken  and 
written,  may  be  due  in  part  to  the  impressions 
of  those  early  years  in  northwestern  Illinois. 

Mr.  McCall  is  the  author  of  two  important 
biographies,  which  are  included  in  the  American 
Statesmen  Series.  They  deal  with  two  men  who, 
in  their  personal  characteristics,  had  much  in 
common.  In  their  masterful  personalities,  their 
caustic  wit,  their  independence,  and  their  readi 
ness  to  adopt  radical  measures  for  the  attainment 

191 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

of  what  seemed  to  them  justifiable  ends,  and 
in  the  strong  antagonism  which  they  aroused, 
Thaddeus  Stevens  and  Thomas  B.  Reed  were 
not  unlike.  But  Mr.  McCall  approached  the 
two  from  totally  different  points  of  view.  He 
was  but  a  boy  of  seventeen  when  Stevens  died. 
The  closest  point  of  contact  between  them  lay  in 
the  fact  that  Mr.  McCall  in  1870  entered  the 
college  from  which  Stevens  had  been  graduated 
in  1814.  There  was  much  in  Stevens's  radical 
ism  with  which  Mr.  McCall  had  no  sympathy, 
and  much  in  his  personality  that  was  repugnant 
to  him.  He  could  write  of  him  in  a  spirit  of 
critical  detachment  which  was  impossible  in  his 
biography  of  Reed.  The  great  Speaker  was  his 
close  friend.  They  had  served  together  in  Con 
gress.  They  thought  alike  upon  most  public 
questions.  They  held  some  opinions  for  which  a 
large  section  of  their  party  wished  to  ostracize 
them,  and  they  were  alike  in  the  tenacious  inde 
pendence  with  which  they  supported  their  con 
victions.  Mr.  McCall's  life  of  Stevens  was, 
therefore,  a  study  of  the  career  of  a  man  who, 
whatever  one's  opinion  of  him  may  be,  was  the 
dominant  force  in  this  country  in  one  of  the 
crises  of  our  history;  but  his  life  of  Reed  was 
a  labor  of  love. 

Perhaps  the  most  prominent  characteristic  of 
192 


THE  MAN  OF  LETTERS 

Mr.  McCall's  life  of  Stevens  is  its  judicial  tone. 
Its  restrained  language  is  in  marked  contrast 
with  the  tempestuous  character  and  stormy  period 
of  which  it  treats.  His  ultimate  judgment  of 
Stevens  and  of  the  great  principles  which  guided 
him  are  thus  set  forth  in  the  concluding  sentences 
of  the  book  :  — 

A  truer  democrat  never  breathed.  Equality  was  the 
animating  principle  of  his  life.  He  deemed  no  man  so 
poor  or  friendless  as  to  be  beneath  the  equal  protection 
of  the  laws,  and  none  so  powerful  as  to  rise  above  their 
sway.  Privilege  never  had  a  more  powerful  nor  a  more 
consistent  foe. 

Nowhere  is  Mr.  McCall's  analysis  of  a  situa 
tion  and  balancing  of  the  factors  which  enter  into 
it  better  exemplified  than  in  his  comment  on 
Lincoln's  policy  of  emancipation  :  — 

Emancipation  was,  above  even  union  itself,  the  great 
contribution  which  the  war  made  to  the  progress  of 
mankind  ;  but  it  was  only  the  wisest  statesmanship  that 
so  shaped  and  directed  the  varying  issues  of  the  war 
that  freedom  was  secured  and  the  Union  saved.  In  a 
great  institution  like  slavery,  as  it  existed,  firmly  in 
trenched  by  law  over  a  great  portion  of  the  country, 
there  is  so  much  that  quickly  becomes  vested,  so  much, 
too,  that  is  sure  to  be  interwoven  into  the  fabric  of  so 
ciety,  that  nothing  short  of  a  great  national  convulsion 
can  remove  it.  It  was  not  difficult  for  those  who  were 
not  financially  interested  in  it,  and  who  looked  upon  it 

193 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

from  a  safe  distance,  to  become  impressed  with  a  sense 
of  its  wickedness.  But  how  to  do  away  with  it  was  a 
problem  for  the  profoundest  statesmanship.  The  most 
casual  survey  of  the  course  of  slavery  to  its  extinction 
will  convince  one  both  of  the  danger  of  agitation  and 
of  the  danger  of  compromise,  when  each  of  them  is 
taken  alone,  but  of  the  potency  of  each  in  finally  set 
ting  in  motion  the  resultant  force  which  brought  forth 
freedom.  Very  many  patriotic  people  were  found  who 
were  willing  to  make  the  best  of  the  evil  in  order  to  be 
at  peace,  or  who  would  at  the  most  employ  palliatives 
and  trust  to  time  to  do  the  work  of  regeneration.  Others 
desired  to  resort  to  methods  which  were  excessively 
heroic,  and  would  have  killed  the  patient  in  order  to 
destroy  the  disease.  The  progress  and  the  very  exist 
ence  of  society  lay  in  the  fact  that  neither  of  these  ex 
treme  views  could  have  its  way,  but  that,  as  a  result 
of  antagonistic,  or  certainly  not  concurrent,  forces  a 
middle  and  safer  pathway  was  pursued.  Whether  slav 
ery  could,  within  any  reasonable  period,  have  been 
blotted  out,  except  through  war,  is  a  question  which 
is  even  now  debated  ;  but  there  can  be  little  doubt  that, 
after  war  had  been  entered  upon,  the  rational  and  con 
servative  course  was  taken,  and  instead  of  sacrificing 
the  Union  by  a  premature  attempt  at  freedom,  or  de 
laying  freedom  until  the  Union  was  lost,  the  time  and 
the  methods  were  chosen  which  made  freedom  more 
certain,  and  made  it  also  an  instrumentality  for  preserv 
ing  the  Union.  It  was  fortunate  that  men  like  Stevens 
foresaw  the  ultimate  result  and  prepared  the  minds  of 
men  to  receive  it.  It  was  fortunate  that  Lincoln  appa- 

194 


THE  MAN  OF  LETTERS 

rently  drifted  with  public  opinion  and  waited  until  the 
moment  was  ripe.  The  immortal  event  was  finally 
consummated,  not  by  one  side  or  extreme  of  humanity, 
but  as  a  result  of  the  combined  wisdom  of  all. 

To  do  exact  justice  to  a  friend  is  a  most  diffi 
cult  task.  Warmth  of  affection  may  result  in 
over-much  laudation,  unless,  on  the  other  hand, 
excess  of  caution  leads  to  the  withholding  of 
merited  praise.  In  writing  his  life  of  Reed,  Mr. 
McCall  met  this  dilemma  by  allowing  Reed  as 
far  as  possible  to  tell  his  own  story.  Mr.  McCall 
has  been  heard  to  say  that  he  regarded  Reed  as 
the  ablest  man  that  he  had  met  in  public  life. 
His  retirement  from  Congress  when  apparently 
at  the  zenith  of  his  power  is  thus  narrated:  — 

In  the  summer  of  1898  Reed  stood  for  election  to 
the  House  for  the  twelfth  time,  and  received  the  great 
majority  that  he  had  become  accustomed  to  receive 
during  the  last  half-dozen  elections  at  which  he  was  a 
candidate.  But  the  difference  between  him  and  the  ad 
ministration  became  more  serious,  as  the  result  of  an 
issue  which  the  war  had  brought  forward.  The  war 
with  Spain  had  proved  a  most  unequal  contest,  because 
of  the  vast  difference  between  the  resources  of  the  two 
nations.  In  the  treaty  of  peace  we  purchased  the  Philip 
pines  and  thereby  purchased  a  war  which  proved  much 
more  deadly  than  that  which  the  treaty  had  brought  to 
an  end.  .  .  .  Reed  profoundly  disbelieved  in  the  exist 
ence  of  a  colonial  theory  of  our  Constitution,  or  in 

195 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

making  an  application  of  such  a  theory  to  the  Philip 
pines  by  taking  on  the  "last  colonial  curse  of  Spain." 
When  therefore  the  islands  had  been  acquired  from 
Spain  by  treaty  made  by  the  President  with  the  advice 
and  consent  of  the  Senate,  and  war  had  been  entered 
upon  for  the  purpose  of  subjugating  their  inhabitants  to 
our  control,  he  determined  to  retire  from  public  life. 
He  said  to  his  trusted  friend  and  secretary,  Asher  C. 
Hinds,  "  I  have  tried,  perhaps  not  always  successfully, 
to  make  the  acts  of  my  public  life  accord  with  my  con 
science,  and  I  cannot  now  do  this  thing." 

When  Reed  resigned,  he  had  just  been  re- 
elected  to  the  House  and  was  assured  of  reelec 
tion  to  the  speakership  —  an  office  of  which  he 
said  that  it  had  but  one  superior  and  no  peer. 
And  it  was  not  unreasonable  for  him  to  look 
forward  to  election  to  the  Presidency.  Surely 
few  men  have  ever  made  a  more  costly  sacrifice 
to  conscience. 

Mr.  McCall  is  not  only  the  biographer  of 
Reed,  but  he  also  pronounced  the  oration  at  the 
unveiling  of  his  statue  in  the  city  of  Portland  in 
1910.  As  a  work  of  literature  it  deserves  to  rank 
with  his  centennial  oration  on  Daniel  Webster. 
There  is  room  here  for  but  one  of  its  many 
beautiful  passages:  — 

Beyond  his  brilliancy  as  a  debater,  his  resplendent 
wit,  and  his  skill  as  a  parliamentary  leader,  his  title  to 
remembrance   rests   upon  his  quality  as  a  statesman. 
196 


THE  MAN  OF  LETTERS 

He  had  a  great  ambition,  but  it  was  not  great  enough 
to  lead  him  to  surrender  any  principle  of  government 
which  he  deemed  vital.  Like  Webster,  like  Clay,  and 
others  of  our  most  conspicuous  statesmen,  he  was  dis 
appointed  at  not  reaching  the  Presidency,  but  he  could 
fitly  aspire  to  the  office,  for  he  was  of  the  fiber  and 
nurture  out  of  which  great  Presidents  are  made.  He 
probably  would  not  have  been  a  continuously  popular 
President,  but  our  great  Presidents  never  have  been. 
He  had  that  supreme  quality  which  was  seen  in  Wash 
ington  breasting  the  popular  anti-British  feeling  and 
asserting  against  France  our  diplomatic  independence; 
in  Lincoln  bearing  the  burden  of  unsuccessful  battles  and 
holding  back  the  sentiment  for  emancipation  until  the 
time  was  ripe  for  freedom;  in  Grant  facing  the  popular 
clamor  and  vetoing  inflation ;  and  in  Cleveland  alienat 
ing  his  party  while  he  persisted  in  as  righteous  and 
heroic  a  battle  as  was  ever  waged  by  a  President. 

Undoubtedly  Mr.  McCall's  most  important 
publication  is  his  book  on  "  The  Business  of 
Congress."  This  consists  of  a  series  of  lectures 
delivered  at  Columbia  University  in  the  winter 
of  1908—09.  To  its  preparation  he  brought  an 
unusual  equipment.  Obviously  such  a  book  could 
be  written  only  by  one  who  had  seen  years  of 
service  in  Congress.  But  in  addition  to  his  ex 
perience  in  the  House,  he  was  possessed  of  a 
wide  knowledge  of  the  history  of  parliamentary 
institutions  in  the  two  countries  in  which  they 

197 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

have  been  most  fully  developed,  and  a  keen  ap 
preciation  of  the  political  principles  on  which 
representative  government  rests.  The  result  is  a 
book  which  is  a  real  contribution  to  the  science 
of  politics.  The  first  chapter  contains  a  note 
worthy  argument  on  the  use  of  the  treaty-making 
power  for  purposes  of  legislation.  In  other  chap 
ters  he  recurs  to  the  theme  on  which  he  has  fre 
quently  spoken  and  written  —  the  proper  rela 
tion  between  the  two  branches  of  Congress  and 
between  Congress  and  the  Executive.  There  is 
an  illuminating  exposition  of  the  functions  of  the 
Speaker  in  the  transaction  of  the  business  of  the 
House  wherein  he  shows  that  much  of  his  power 
is  derived  from  the  fact  that  in  becoming  Speaker 
he  does  not  lose  his  membership  in  the  House,  but 
retains  all  the  rights  possessed  by  other  members. 
The  last  chapter  of  the  book,  which  bears  the 
caption  "Results,"  is  an  impressive  account  of 
the  outcome  of  representative  institutions  as  seen 
in  the  working  of  the  Government  at  Washing 
ton.  It  may  be  doubted  whether  any  more 
thoughtful  and  weighty  comment  upon  certain 
tendencies  in  American  government  has  ever 
been  written. 

Mr.  McCall  has  been  the  orator  on  many  fes 
tival  or  commemorative  occasions  when  fitness 
required  scholarship  and  a  gift  of  literary  expres- 
198 


THE  MAN  OF  LETTERS 

sion.  He  is  a  member  of  Phi  Beta  Kappa,  and 
various  chapters  of  that  organization  have  turned 
to  him  for  the  annual  address  which  is  a  fixed  in 
stitution  in  the  activities  of  that  learned  society. 
In  1904,  when  he  delivered  the  oration  before 
the  Harvard  Chapter  of  Phi  Beta  Kappa,  he  chose 
as  his  theme  "  The  Newspaper  Press."  Few  men 
in  public  life  could  have  treated  it  so  adequately, 
for  he  brought  to  it  not  only  the  results  of  his 
observation  of  the  press  as  a  factor  in  the  forma 
tion  of  that  public  opinion  upon  which  the  action 
of  a  great  democracy  is  based,  but  also  his  expe 
rience  as  the  editor  in  chief  of  an  important  daily 
newspaper.  The  address  is  so  closely  knit  that 
it  inevitably  suffers  from  condensation,  but  the 
following  passages  will  convey  some  conception 
of  its  thought  and  form  :  — 

Sydney  Smith  said  that  reputation  is  one  of  the  prizes 
for  which  men  contend,  and  therefore  that  praise  should 
should  not  be  given  unless  justly  due.  Praise  should  not 
be  bestowed  grudgingly  when  deserved,  but  it  violates 
the  inherent  sense  of  justice  to  confer  the  palm  not 
upon  the  swift  runner  but  upon  the  laggard.  I  fancy 
no  one  would  accuse  our  press  as  a  whole  with  dis 
crimination  or  even  an  attempt  at  a  just  holding  of 
the  scales.  Gross  exaggeration  as  a  daily  mental  diet 
helps  to  engender  a  condition  of  mind  in  the  American 
people  which  is  only  satisfied  by  the  constant  employ 
ment  of  superlatives  —  a  condition  which  finds  its  con- 

199 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

summate  flowering-out  in  our  national  conventions, 
where  to  the  incredible  laudation  of  words  is  added  a 
noisy  powwow,  running  thirty  minutes  by  the  clock, 
from  which  nothing  is  lacking  but  enthusiasm  and  paint 
to  make  it  a  reproduction  of  the  war-dance  of  the  sav 
age.  Our  newspapers  alternate  between  violent  eulogy 
and  violent  abuse.  You  may  read  the  contemporary  his 
tories  of  the  golden  age  of  American  eloquence  or  of 
the  time  when  Gladstone,  Peel,  Disraeli,  and  Palmer- 
ston  were  contending  for  supremacy  in  the  British  Par 
liament,  and  you  will  find,  if  not  always  measured  and 
temperate  statement,  at  least  the  lineaments  of  the  great 
actors  retaining  the  appearance  of  real  humanity.  But 
living  in  an  era  of  the  headline  and  the  limelight,  news 
papers  speak  of  our  war  ministers  often  in  terms  that 
could  not  justly  be  applied  to  Stanton  and  Carnot ;  we 
have  secretaries  who  eclipse  Adams  and  Webster ;  and 
statesmen,  who  in  former  times  were  developed  by  a 
long  discipline  and  training  in  their  calling,  now  spring 
full-armed  from  the  head  of  the  appointing  power.  They 
will  paint  the  war  bantam  as  the  eagle  and  drive  the  eagle 
from  the  sky.  Charges  of  criminality  will  be  leveled  at 
large  numbers  of  men  in  the  mass  and,  by  way  of  com 
pensation,  other  men  will  be  exalted  to  the  heavens. 
Abuse,  however,  greatly  predominates  over  commenda 
tion,  especially  in  the  treatment  of  agencies  of  govern 
ment.  To  illustrate :  There  may  be  instances  in  recent 
years  when  a  State  Legislature  has  been  spoken  of  by 
the  newspapers  in  any  other  terms  than  of  derision  and 
contempt,  but  if  so  the  instances  are  rare  indeed.  If  the 
press  is  justified  in  the  matter,  one  of  two  conclusions 

200 


THE  MAN  OF  LETTERS 

follows,  either  that  the  American  people  are  not  far  from 
being  a  corrupt  people,  or  that  they  usually  elect  their 
worst  men  to  public  office.  There  has  been  a  reversal 
of  conditions  since  the  first  appearance  of  newspapers. 
Then  the  Government  persecuted  the  press  and  now 
the  press  is  apt  to  persecute  the  Government.  Criticism, 
of  course,  only  attains  its  object  when  it  is  discrimi 
nating  and  just.  Unrestrained,  furious,  and  unjust  at 
tack  can  in  no  sense  be  called  criticism,  but  it  is  de 
structive  of  its  ends.  Since  the  public  must  see  public 
officers  chiefly  through  the  press,  it  is  necessary  that 
it  should  be  vigilant,  sparing  no  wrongdoing  wherever 
it  may  exist,  but  it  is  as  necessary,  too,  that  it  should  be 
just.  Unsparing  denunciation,  particularly  of  represen 
tative  bodies,  has  become  a  seated  habit.  The  people 
come  to  recognize  this  habit  of  mind  and  are  less  in 
fluenced  by  it.  Indeed,  on  more  than  one  important 
occasion,  when  the  press  was  united  in  support  of  a 
good  political  cause,  it  has  gone  down  to  defeat  largely 
because  the  weight  of  its  opinion  had  been  impaired  by 
its  own  intemperance. 

But  the  real  danger  after  all  probably  lies  in  the  oppo 
site  direction.  The  press  is  more  apt  to  combine  with 
the  Government,  especially  if  it  be  a  Government  of 
the  blessed  paternalistic  kind.  Newspapers  already  are 
a  species  of  monopoly.  They  are  increasingly  hard  to  set 
on  foot.  That  fact  is  the  prime  cause  of  yellow  jour 
nalism.  Great  sums  of  money  legitimately  expended 
are  hardly  adequate  to  establish  a  newspaper,  and  it  be 
comes  necessary  in  addition  to  employ  the  arts  of  the 
showman,  the  art  of  the  pander,  and  to  appeal  to  the 

201 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

side  of  human  nature  most  easily  reached,  which  is  the 
side  of  passion.  With  the  present  economic  tendency 
continuing,  the  time  is  not  far  distant  when  it  will  be 
nearly  as  difficult  to  create  a  new  newspaper  as  to  cre 
ate  a  new  coal-mine.  The  great  news  centers  are  com 
paratively  few,  and  so  are  the  important  newspapers. 
Combinations  have  already  been  made  for  the  purpose 
of  collecting  news  —  combinations  perfectly  natural  and 
highly  beneficial  to  the  public  because  they  have  tended 
to  do  away  with  the  competition  to  tell  the  largest  story, 
and  they  furnish  us  to-day  with  the  greater  part  of  the 
real  news.  The  general  tendency  to  combination,  al 
ready  at  work  in  the  newspaper  field,  will  not  need  to 
proceed  far  before  we  shall  have,  if  not  a  common  own 
ership  of  newspapers,  at  least  a  "gentleman's  agree 
ment"  or  the  " community  of  interest"  plan,  and  we 
shall  have  our  news  "barons"  as  well  as  our  steel  and 
coal  "  barons."  Great  capitalists  do  not  fancy  agitation. 
They  prefer  to  have  things  go  along  as  they  are.  Being 
on  the  box-seat,  they  are  willing  to  let  well  enough  alone. 
And  so  there  is  a  likelihood  that  there  may  be  a  new  sort 
of  partnership  with  the  Government,  not  the  kind  of  a 
partnership  which  existed  until  lately  in  Germany  when 
policemen  acted  as  editors-in-chief,  putting  the  finish 
ing  touches  upon  editorials,  and  harmonizing  everything 
with  the  Government's  wishes,  but  a  partnership  of 
real  interest  where  rich  newspaper  owners  and  the  indi 
viduals  controlling  the  Government  will  desire  to  "  stand 
pat"  and  keep  what  they  have.  Then  we  should  have 
the  really  strong  newspapers  smugly  proclaiming  to  the 
multitude  the  freedom  so  full  of  blessings  to  themselves, 

202 


THE  MAN  OF  LETTERS 

and  the  struggling,  short-lived  newspaper,  wildly  crying 
out  for  liberty,  and  smearing  on  the  yellow  in  order  to 
gain  a  living  support.  I  imagine  none  of  us,  if  we  were 
there,  would  fancy  either  of  these  sorts  of  newspaper, 
but  as  between  the  sleek,  thoroughly  commercialized 
champion  of  privilege,  trying  to  lead  public  opinion  in 
the  direction  of  its  own  interests,  baffling  justice  in  her 
eternal  struggle  to  give  one  measure  to  all  men,  and 
the  miserable  starving  yellow  sheet,  protesting  against 
a  system  of  government  for  the  benefit  of  the  few,  I 
trust  we  should  be  with  the  yellow  starveling. 

At  Tufts  College  in  1903  he  again  appeared 
as  the  Phi  Beta  Kappa  orator,  and  spoke  on 
the  subject  "  The  Scholar  in  Politics  a  Conserva 
tive,"  —  an  address  which  he  later  repeated  in 
substance  at  the  Louisiana  State  University.  He 
deprecated  the  idea  that  education  comes  only 
from  the  schools,  or  that  educated  men  consti 
tute  a  separate  class.  But  it  was  with  the  duty 
of  educated  men  toward  the  public  that  he  was 
concerned,  and  he  argued  that  it  was  incumbent 
upon  them  particularly  to  preserve  what  had  been 
won  in  the  way  of  ordered  liberty. 

In  despotic  governments,  which  cherish  the  privileges 
of  the  few  rather  than  the  good  of  the  many,  the  real 
scholar  is  usually  radical.  If  he  is  honest  he  will  likely 
incur  ostracism  or  banishment  in  proclaiming  the  evils 
which  he  perceives.  But  in  a  democratic  government, 
where  there  is  substantial  equality  of  political  rights 

203 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

and  where  the  State  may  be  embarked  upon  perilous 
enterprises  with  little  knowledge,  I  think  the  highest 
function  of  the  scholar  is  to  be  conservative.  He  will 
preserve  the  liberty  which  exists  by  preventing  hazard 
ous  and  doubtful  experiments,  and  by  preventing  the 
excesses  which  are  the  common  cause  for  superseding  a 
democratic  government  by  government  of  a  more  ex 
clusive  character.  The  American  Constitution  is  not 
exactly  what  Macaulay  characterized  it,  "  all  sail  and 
no  anchor,"  but  it  so  readily  permits  motion  that  a  con 
servative  force  becomes  vitally  important. 

The  spirit  of  the  ideal  citizen  under  a  government 
like  ours  will  be  what  Stevenson  calls  the  "  hope-starred, 
full-blooded  spirit,"  at  once  aggressive  and  sane,  which 
shows  its  exuberance  rather  in  preserving  and  building 
up  than  in  smashing  the  existing  order.  Assuming  that 
our  system  of  government  is  the  justest  yet  discovered, 
that  better  than  any  other  it  gives  to  each  individual  the 
opportunity  of  self-development,  this  spirit  will  occupy 
itself  in  preserving  our  democracy  from  the  peculiar  evils 
to  which  democracy  is  liable,  and,  for  the  sake  of  pre 
serving  it,  will  batter  down  the  palpable  abuses  which 
threaten  the  system.  Do  not  imagine  that  an  easy  task. 
It  will  require  almost  the  ferocity  of  spirit  of  rare  Ben 
Jonson  when  he  said :  — 

"  With  an  armed  and  resolved  hand, 
I  '11  strip  the  ragged  follies  of  my  time, 
Naked  as  at  their  birth.    And  with  a  whip  of  steel, 
Print  wounding  lashes  in  their  iron  ribs. 
I  fear  no  mood,  stampt  in  a  private  brow, 
When  I  am  pleased  t'  unmask  a  public  vice.'* 

204 


THE  MAN  OF  LETTERS 

It  was  of  this  address  that  William  James 
wrote :  — 

It  seems  to  me,  both  for  form  and  matter,  to  belong 
to  the  very  best  type  of  oratory  embodying  political 
thought.  Its  wisdom  is  as  deep  as  its  epigrams  are  sharp ; 
it  is  a  memorable  utterance,  and  I  hope  it  may  become 
classical. 

How  admirably  Mr.  McCall  would  have  ful 
filled  the  functions  of  historian  had  he  chosen  to 
devote  himself  to  the  interpretation  of  the  past 
appears  from  his  comment  on  John  Brown's 
raid  which  forms  part  of  his  memorial  address 
on  Colonel  Thomas Wentworth  Higginson:  — 

While  Higginson  was  not  disposed  to  shirk  one 
particle  of  responsibility,  it  is  clear  that  he  did  not 
understand  the  exact  nature  of  the  raid  beforehand,  as 
it  was  actually  put  into  execution,  and  the  same  is 
doubtless  true  of  most,  if  not  all,  of  the  other  people  in 
Massachusetts  who  were  interested  with  him.  So  far  as 
I  have  been  able  to  learn,  Higginson  supposed  that 
Brown  intended  to  establish  an  underground  railway, 
such  as  he  had  operated  in  Missouri,  and  that  it  was  his 
object  to  free  individual  slaves,  to  conceal  them  in  the 
Alleghany  Mountains,  and  if  necessary  to  defend  their 
freedom.  When  it  came  time  for  Brown  to  put  his 
plan  into  execution,  with  a  remarkable  aberration  of 
judgment,  he  openly  began  war  upon  the  National  Gov 
ernment  by  capturing  the  arsenal  at  Harper's  Ferry. 
Frederick  Douglass  attempted  in  vain  to  dissuade  him 

205 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

from  the  plan  and  give  him  sensible  advice.  The  attack 
on  the  arsenal  Douglass  declared  was  an  attack  on  the 
Federal  Government  and  would  array  the  whole  coun 
try  against  him ;  it  "  was  a  perfect  steel  trap,"  Doug 
lass  said,  and  once  within  it,  he  would  never  be  able  to 
get  out  alive.  The  enterprise  as  Brown  developed  it 
was  entirely  impossible  of  success  and  resulted  in  the  de 
struction  of  many  lives,  the  first  victim  being  an  inno 
cent  free  negro.  Mr.  Villard  in  his  "Life"  of  Brown, 
in  which  he  shows  a  remarkable  desire  to  chronicle  the 
exact  facts,  leaves  little  room  for  doubt,  upon  the  ma 
terial  he  has  collected,  as  to  the  cause  of  Brown's  ex 
traordinary  action.  Mr.  John  M.  Forbes,  at  whose  house 
Brown  once  visited,  spoke  of  the  look  of  insanity  in  his 
"glittering  gray-blue  eyes."  Brown's  own  personal  his 
tory  and  that  of  his  family  would  have  made  perfect  the 
defense  of  insanity,  if  any  additional  evidence  were 
needed  to  that  which  the  character  of  the  raid  itself  af 
forded.  He  certainly  did  not  have  the  kind  of  responsi 
bility  that  should  have  sent  him  to  the  scaffold.  The  un 
doubted  effect  of  the  raid  was  to  produce  a  genuine 
alarm  in  the  South.  It  is  not  so  clear  that  it  strength 
ened  abolitionism  in  the  North.  At  any  rate,  this  much 
is  true — that  in  the  critical  winter  of  1 860-61  the 
cause  of  abolitionism  seemed  to  have  less  strength  than  it 
had  ever  had  after  it  had  become  an  established  agitation. 
The  most  abhorrent  compromises  with  slavery,  such 
as  had  never  been  dreamed  of  by  the  Whigs,  were 
passed  through  both  Houses  of  Congress  by  the  votes 
of  the  Republican  members.  As  to  one  of  the  important 
counts  in  the  indictment  against  Webster,  his  accept- 

206 


THE  MAN  OF  LETTERS 

ance  in  the  Compromise  of  1850  of  the  proposition 
that  certain  Territories  should  be  permitted  to  decide 
for  themselves  whether  they  would  have  slavery  when 
they  should  be  admitted  to  the  Union  —  that  was 
one  of  the  mildest  of  the  compromises  offered  and 
voted  for  by  Republicans  in  Congress  in  the  winter 
of  1860.  Freedom  was  indeed  brought  about  by  a  rev 
olution,  but  it  was  not  a  revolution  inaugurated  by  the 
enemies  of  slavery  but  by  its  friends.  The  force  that 
won  freedom  was  the  force  of  law.  We  can  all  admire 
Brown's  fervent  zeal  for  freedom,  but  it  would  be  very 
dangerous  to  sanction  the  methods  which  he  employed. 
Slavery  was  a  terrible  thing,  but  in  the  opinion  of  men 
living  to-day  there  are  many  other  terrible  things  in  so 
ciety.  Often  real  wrongs  find  shelter  for  a  time  under 
any  system  of  government,  as  well  as  fancied  wrongs, 
and  often  men  whose  minds  dwell  upon  a  single  evil 
will  come  to  think  of  it  as  the  sum  of  all  evil.  Men 
have  a  laudable  way  of  devising  political  inventions 
for  making  society  better,  if  not  perfect.  These  are 
somewhat  like  the  inventions  in  the  Patent  Office, 
a  very  large  proportion  of  which  are  ingenious  but  not 
practical,  and  it  often  happens  that  the  less  of  real  value 
a  political  or  mechanical  invention  has  the  more  it  is 
believed  to  have  by  the  man  who  possesses  it  or  who  is 
possessed  by  it.  Some  of  these  inventors  are  likely  to 
take  the  law  into  their  own  hands,  and,  if  they  cannot 
do  so  peaceably,  to  employ  violent  methods  to  establish 
their  reform.  The  true  method  of  providing  remedies 
under  a  government  like  ours  is  by  a  resolute  and  law 
ful  agitation  such  as  Garrison  employed.  Any  other 

207 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

principle  than  that  would  make  violence  the  agency  of 
reform,  dynamite  and  the  dagger  would  take  the  place  of 
discussion,  and  government  by  law  would  cease  to  exist. 

The  most  recent  of  his  books  is  the  series  of 
lectures  delivered  at  Yale  University  in  1915 
and  published  under  the  title  "  The  Liberty 
of  Citizenship."  The  Dodge  Lectureship  at  Yale 
has  been  held  by  many  eminent  men,  among 
whom  were  President  Taft,  Lord  Bryce,  Justice 
Brewer,  Justice  Hughes,  Secretary  Root,  Bishop 
Potter,  President  Hadley,  and  Governor  Bald 
win.  This  was  a  lofty  succession,  and  when  Mr. 
McCall  undertook  the  duties  of  the  lectureship 
he  recurred  to  the  theme  which  more  than  any 
other  runs  through  the  whole  of  his  public  career. 
He  embodied  in  these  lectures  much  that  he 
had  said  on  the  same  subject  on  other  occasions, 
but  the  fundamental  importance  of  the  theme 
justifies  the  repetition.  He  feels  that  one  of  the 
greatest  dangers  which  threaten  American  life 
to-day  is  the  constant  curtailment  of  individual 
freedom  by  unwise  governmental  restraint. 

Those  who  confuse  liberty  with  democracy  are  prone 
to  decide  that  whatever  fetters  democracy  may  fasten 
upon  man,  he  still  remains  free.  But  freedom  to  man 
in  society  consists  in  his  right  to  use  his  faculties  and 
to  profit  by  their  use,  subject  to  the  equal  right  of  other 
men  to  do  likewise,  and  it  is  the  important  function  of 
208 


THE  MAN  OF  LETTERS 

the  State  to  restrain  only  such  exercise  of  his  faculties 
by  man  as  may  injure  others.  With  this  qualification 
freedom  should  be  safeguarded,  not  merely  because  it 
is  a  right  of  the  individual  man,  but  because  its  enjoy 
ment  by  developing  enterprise  has  been  the  great  agency 
in  pushing  forward  civilization.  And  men  should  be  per 
mitted  to  build  up  their  characters  in  the  only  way  in 
which  strong  and  robust  characters  can  be  built,  not  in 
the  stifling  hothouse  of  governmental  restraint,  but  in 
the  free  and  open  fields  played  upon  by  the  sunshine 
and  beaten  by  winds  and  storms. 

Dartmouth  is  perhaps  the  only  American 
college  which  has  felt  justified  in  celebrating  the 
centennial  of  the  graduation  of  one  of  its  alumni. 
The  place  of  Daniel  Webster  in  American  his 
tory,  his  supereminent  qualities  as  an  orator,  and 
his  peculiar  services  to  his  alma  mater  made  such 
a  celebration  as  appropriate  as  it  was  unique. 
Of  the  other  figures  in  American  public  life 
who  were  worthy  of  such  a  distinction,  Wash 
ington  and  Franklin  and  Lincoln  were  not  col 
lege  men,  and  Hamilton's  course  at  Columbia 
was  abandoned  at  the  outbreak  of  the  Revolu 
tion.  The  invitation  to  Mr.  McCall  to  deliver 
the  commemorative  oration  was  one  of  the  most 
gratifying  distinctions  of  his  life.  Webster  had 
been  one  of  the  heroes  of  his  boyhood,  and  his 
maturer  years  had  found  a  solid  basis  for  his 
youthful  judgment.  The  address  which  he  pre- 
209 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

pared  was  therefore  much  more  than  a  formal 
tribute  to  an  eminent  public  man.  There  was  a 
warmth  of  personal  feeling  in  it  which  sets  it 
apart  from  the  usual  commemorative  oration. 

One  of  its  most  beautiful  passages  pictures 
the  orator :  — 

The  transcendently  great  orator,  who  has  kindled 
his  own  time  and  nation  to  action,  and  who  also  speaks 
to  foreign  nations  and  to  distant  ages,  must  divide  with 
great  poets  the  affectionate  homage  of  mankind.  While 
the  stirring  history  of  the  Greek  people  and  its  noble 
literature  shall  continue  to  have  charm  and  interest  for 
men,  the  wonderfully  chiseled  periods  of  Demosthenes 
and  the  simple  yet  lofty  speech  of  Pericles  will  be  no 
less  immortal  than  the  odes  of  Pindar  or  the  tragedies 
of  Sophocles  or  ^Eschylus.  The  light  that  glows  upon 
the  pages  of  Virgil  shines  with  no  brighter  radiance  than 
that  seen  in  those  glorious  speeches  with  which  Cicero 
moved  that  imperial  race  that  dominated  the  world. 
The  glowing  oratory  of  Edmund  Burke  will  live  until 
sensibility  to  beauty  and  the  generous  love  of  liberty 
shall  die.  And  I  believe  the  words  of  Webster,  nobly 
voicing  the  possibilities  of  a  mighty  nation  as  yet  only 
dimly  conscious  of  its  destiny,  will  continue  to  roll  on 
the  ears  of  men  while  the  nation  he  helped  to  fashion 
shall  endure,  or  indeed  while  government  founded  upon 
popular  freedom  shall  remain  an  instrument  of  civiliza 
tion. 

In  1913  Mr.  McCall  again  paid  tribute  to  the 
hero  of  his  boyhood  when  he  delivered  the  chief 
210 


THE  MAN  OF  LETTERS 

address  at  the  dedication  of  Webster's  birthplace 
at  Franklin,  New  Hampshire.  In  his  concluding 
sentences  he  spoke  with  marked  tenderness  of 
Webster's  character,  and  in  a  spirit  of  charity  and 
justice  and  comprehensive  recognition  of  his 
service  in  developing  a  sentiment  of  nationality, 
he  weighed  his  faults  against  his  great  virtues  :  — 

His  faults  were  those  of  a  great  and  lavish  nature.  If 
he  sometimes  forgot  to  pay  his  debts  he  often  forgot  to 
demand  his  own  due.  They  said  he  was  reckless  in  ex 
pense.  But  instead  of  squandering  his  substance  at  the 
gambling  table  according  to  the  common  vice  among 
the  statesmen  of  his  day,  his  extravagance  consisted  in 
the  generous  entertainment  of  friends,  in  choice  herds 
of  cattle  and  in  the  dissipation  shown  in  cultivated  fields. 
If  he  put  Story  under  tribute  to  serve  him  upon  public 
questions,  he  himself  would  neglect  the  Senate  and  the 
courts  and  for  nights  and  days  watch  by  the  bedside  of 
a  sick  boy.  His  faults  did  not  touch  the  integrity  of  his 
public  character  and  were  such  as  link  him  to  our  hu 
manity.  If  he  had  been  impeccable,  incapable  to  err, 
with  no  trace  about  him  of  our  human  clay,  a  Titan  in 
strength  but  with  no  touch  of  weakness,  we  should  be 
dedicating  to-day  the  birthplace,  not  of  a  man  but  of  a 
god.  A  superb  flower  of  our  race,  he  was  still  a  man 
and  he  is  nearer  to  us  because  he  was  a  man.  Product 
of  this  soil  and  these  mountain  winds,  of  this  sky,  the 
sunshine  of  the  summer  and  of  the  winter  snows,  the 
hardships  of  the  frontier,  the  swift-moving  currents  of 
his  country's  life,  the  myriad  accidents  that  envelop  us 

211 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

all,  we  reverently  receive  the  gift  and  thank  God  to-day 
for  Daniel  Webster  as  he  was.  We  who  meet  here  may 
speak  for  the  millions  of  our  countrymen  when  we  do 
this  homage  to  his  memory.  We  reverence  the  great 
lawyer,  the  peerless  orator  and  the  brilliant  literary  genius. 
But  most  of  all  we  honor  the  memory  of  the  statesman 
who  kindled  the  spirit  of  nationality  so  that  it  burned 
into  a  flame,  who  broke  through  the  strong  bonds  of 
sectionalism  and  taught  men  to  regard  their  greater  coun 
try,  and  whose  splendid  service  in  making  his  country 
what  she  is  and  what  she  may  hope  to  be  has  won  for 
this  son  of  New  Hampshire  a  lasting  and  a  priceless  fame. 

The  American  people  have  been  strangely 
neglectful  of  the  fame  of  Alexander  Hamilton. 
Whether  because  he  was  overshadowed  by  Wash 
ington  ;  whether  because  he  never  came  to  the 
Presidency  nor  occupied  a  seat  in  either  house 
of  Congress ;  or  whether  because  of  the  brevity 
of  his  life,  the  fact  remains  that  it  is  only  in  com 
paratively  recent  years  that  he  has  been  acknowl 
edged  as  the  most  creative  of  our  statesmen  and 
the  most  brilliant  intellect  that  ever  appeared  in 
American  politics.  Mr.  McCall's  address  advo 
cating  the  erection  of  a  monument  to  Hamilton 
in  the  National  Capital,  while  comparatively 
brief,  is  marked  by  incisive  analysis  and  a  clear 
comprehension  of  the  functions  of  a  statesman. 
Particularly  happy  is  the  perception  of  Hamil 
ton^  relation  to  Washington:  — 

212 


THE  MAN  OF  LETTERS 

In  one  respect  no  statesman  was  ever  more  fortu 
nate  than  Hamilton.  Probably  he  would  have  produced 
his  financial  and  economic  policies  without  the  aid  of 
Washington,  but  he  never  would  have  been  able  to  put 
them  into  effect.  Washington  was  the  greatest  man  of 
his  time.  He  has  been  surpassed  by  many  other  men  in 
some  single  element  of  greatness.  But  there  was  never 
in  any  other  man  such  a  blending  of  great  qualities, 
each  in  its  due  and  exact  proportions,  and  he  had  a 
regular  and  balanced  genius  that  makes  him  unique 
among  all  figures  of  history.  In  the  most  trying  times 
of  peace  and  war  he  had  revealed  himself  to  his  coun 
trymen  and  they  knew  him  as  he  was.  Thus  he  had  a 
degree  of  authority  among  masses  of  the  people  which 
was  probably  never  attained  by  any  other  statesman. 
The  policies  of  Hamilton  were  carried  by  the  magic 
of  Washington's  name,  and  those  policies  were  so  out 
of  touch  with  the  ideas  and  passions  of  the  times  that 
even  the  influence  of  Washington  was  none  too  great. 
Washington  knew  Hamilton  as  only  he  could  know 
one  who,  during  long  years  of  war,  had  held  the  most 
confidential  place  upon  his  staff.  He  knew  Hamilton's 
strength  and  weakness.  He  knew  how  to  direct  and 
restrain  him.  His  marvelous  good  sense  could  provide 
the  needed  touch  to  make  the  difference  between  suc 
cess  and  failure.  There  were  no  two  great  men  of  his 
tory  whose  careers  were  more  intimately  blended.  What 
a  fortunate  thing  their  union  was  for  America.  When 
we  regard  the  one  we  are  sure  to  think  of  the  other. 
We  look  upon  the  grandeur  of  Washington's  fame  with 
the  awe  and  reverence  which  a  near  approach  to  per- 

213 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

fection  inspires.  We  do  not  find  in  Hamilton  that  bal 
anced  greatness.  But  he  had  creative  qualities  in  which 
he  stands  peerless  among  our  statesmen.  He  survives 
to-day  in  the  very  structure  and  fiber  of  the  Nation  and 
of  its  Government.  And  his  countrymen  even  yet  feel 
the  light  and  heat  of  his  splendid  genius. 

At  the  dedication  of  a  statue  to  General  Wil 
liam  F.  Draper,  distinguished  for  many  inven 
tions  in  connection  with  the  development  of  the 
textile  art,  Mr.  McCall  said  as  to  the  place  of 
invention  in  the  long  journey  of  mankind:  — 

Every  faculty  of  man  has  been  incredibly  magnified 
by  invention.  He  has  been,  as  it  were,  created  anew 
with  superlatively  greater  powers.  The  distance  between 
the  naked  human  fist  and  the  modern  battleship  as  im 
plements  of  warfare  measures  no  greater  progress  than 
has  been  shown  in  those  less  destructive  arts  that  min 
ister  to  the  well-being  and  comfort  of  man.  The  same 
contrast  is  seen  between  the  unclad  savage,  feeding  pre 
cariously  upon  the  free  fruits  of  the  earth,  wandering 
through  his  lifetime  over  the  hills  and  fields  where  he 
was  born,  seeking  shelter  in  caves  and  coping  with  the 
appalling  difficulties  about  him  with  his  unaided  human 
strength,  and  the  man  of  to-day,  housed  and  clothed  in 
comfort  and  luxury,  his  table  spread  with  food  from 
every  clime,  the  pressure  of  whose  finger  may  fill  with 
light  a  great  city,  who  may  ride  like  Ariel  "  on  the 
curFd  clouds,"  and  whose  very  whisper  may  be  heard 
a  hundred  leagues.  As  one  of  the  results  of  invention, 
the  wants  of  the  human  animal  are  multiplied  by  the 
214 


THE  MAN  OF  LETTERS 

increased  means  of  ministering  to  them,  and  man  is 
made  a  vastly  more  complex,  if  not  a  better,  being. 
Increased  wants  become  necessities,  and  it  may  be  that 
the  struggle  for  existence,  although  with  little  of  the 
hardship,  is  not  less  strenuous  than  in  the  primitive 
times.  But  undoubtedly  the  world  is  thus  made  a  much 
greater,  more  complex  and  more  interesting  world  to 
live  in.  ... 

It  is  of  the  very  essence  of  civilization,  therefore,  to 
tempt  man  to  conquer  the  unknown,  to  extend  the 
boundaries  of  human  knowledge  and  to  widen  the  sway 
of  the  race,  so  that,  if  it  may,  it  shall  encompass  the 
very  stars. 

When  the  mine  yields  such  rich  ore,  the  temp 
tation  to  make  further  drafts  upon  it  is  great. 
Throughout  Mr.  McCall's  speeches  and  writings 
are  compact  phrases  which  carry  an  argument  in 
themselves.  It  is  in  one  of  his  committee  reports 
that  the  famous  sentence  "  Freedom  follows  the 
flag  "  first  made  its  appearance.  "  The  little  breed 
of  noisy  politicians  who  defame  their  own  virtue 
by  always  vaunting  it"  vividly  depicts-a  phase  of 
human  nature  which  is  not  confined  to  politicians. 
In  a  sober  discussion  of  the  tariff,  he  said  :  — 

The  payment  of  dividends  upon  issues  of  water  and 
even  of  atmosphere  has  never  yet  been  avowed  to  be 
one  of  the  objects  of  protection. 

The  same  paper  is  enlivened  by  these  observa 
tions: — 

215 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

The  gentlemen  who  manage  the  Steel  Trust  do  not 
take  more  than  they  can  get;  but  they  display  the  usual 
amount  of  human  moderation,  and  get  what  they  can. 
Being  patriots,  they  could  not  be  so  treasonable  and  so 
untrue  to  the  demands  of  good  citizenship  as  to  refuse 
what  the  law  forced  upon  them. 

Humor  and  imagination  are  happily  combined 
in  this  picture  :  — 

What  is  the  central  idea  of  citizenship  ?  I  have  a 
notion  that  it  is  one  of  relation  to  others.  No  one  can  be 
a  citizen  all  by  himself.  Robinson  Crusoe  may  have  been 
a  sovereign,  but  a  citizen  he  could  not  be.  The  conflicts 
between  labor  and  capital  that  rent  his  little  state  were 
only  such  as  swept  across  his  own  breast.  Most  envied 
of  mortals,  he  could  placidly  monopolize  any  part  of  the 
trade  and  commerce  upon  his  island  without  fear  of  be 
ing  proceeded  against  under  any  Sherman  Anti-Trust 
Law.  He  could  follow  his  ancient  habit  of  taking  nine 
hours'  sleep  each  night  and  not  be  stigmatized  as  a  re 
actionary.  Happy  old  citizen  of  the  universe,  hero  of 
so  many  generations  of  youngsters  of  all  ages,  you  and 
your  mythical  island  have  become  objects  of  admiration 
and  envy  to  old  boys  as  well  as  young  whose  elbow 
room  in  this  world  is  being  painfully  hedged  in. 

In  sharp  contrast  with  this  is  this  picture  which 
suggests  the  solemnity  of  a  Greek  tragedy:  — 

The  baleful  Goddess  of  Detraction  sits  ever  at  the 
elbow  of  Fame  unsweetening  what  is  written  upon  the 
record. 


CHAPTER   VIII 

MR.    MCCALL 

THE  opinions  of  a  statesman  upon  the  pub 
lic  questions  of  his  day  and  the  measures 
which  he  has  originated  or  supported  are  all  an 
essential  part  of  the  record,  but  they  tell  little  of 
the  human  personality  which  lies  behind  and  of 
the  man's  intimate  relations  with  his  fellow  men. 
Hence,  .the  account  of  Mr.  McCall's  life  as  a 
public  man  should  be  supplemented  by  some 
impression  of  him  as  he  appears  in  his  family 
circle  and  among  his  friends. 

The  independence  of  mind  which  Mr.  McCall 
has  displayed  by  refusing  on  numerous  occasions 
to  follow  his  party  has  led  to  his  being  described 
as  an  insurgent  —  a  term  of  such  belligerent 
suggestion  as  to  convey  the  impression  of  an 
antagonistic  or  pugnacious  disposition.  Nothing 
could  be  farther  from  the  truth.  He  finds  no 
satisfaction  in  disagreeing  with  men  whom  he 
admires  and  esteems.  So  far  as  in  him  lies  he 
would  be  glad  to  live  at  peace  with  all  men,  but 
he  is  not  willing  to  purchase  peace  by  the  sacri 
fice  of  his  convictions.  He  does  not  welcome 

217 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

differences,  and  when  he  finds  himself  in  disagree 
ment  with  those  about  him  it  is  not  his  habit  to 
give  expression  to  his  own  opinion  unless  he 
feels  that  the  occasion  demands  it.  Even  his 
family  have  sometimes  been  surprised  to  find, 
when  they  came  to  carry  out  a  plan  which  had 
been  discussed  in  his  presence  and  from  which 
he  did  not  dissent,  that  all  the  while  he  had  been 
silently  disapproving.  When  he  does  express  dis 
sent,  he  avoids  personal  criticism.  In  debating 
public  measures  he  addresses  his  discussion  to 
the  measure  in  hand  and  not  to  the  men  who 
may  be  opposed  to  his  views.  It  is  rarely  that 
anything  in  the  nature  of  a  personality  can  be 
found  in  his  speeches. 

Mr.  McCall's  books  and  speeches  supply 
abundant  evidence  of  his  scholarly  tastes.  As  a 
student  he  received  unusually  thorough  instruc 
tion  in  the  classics,  but  unlike  most  college 
graduates  he  has  taken  pains  to  preserve  and  to 
extend  his  knowledge  in  that  field.  This  is 
due  partly  to  his  fondness  for  the  masterpieces 
of  Greek  and  Roman  literature  and  partly  to 
his  sense  of  the  value  of  classical  studies  as  a 
means  of  intellectual  discipline.  On  his  last  trip 
to  Europe  he  availed  himself  of  the  leisure  af 
forded  by  the  voyage  to  read  the  "  Odyssey," 
and  recent  visitors  to  his  office  in  the  State 
218 


Photograph  by  Henry  Havelock  Pierce 

MRS.   SAMUEL  W.    McCALL 


MR.  McCALL 

House  in  Boston  could  have  seen  a  copy  of  it 
lying  on  his  desk.  His  intimacy  with  Greek 
literature  appeared  in  his  farewell  address  to  the 
House,  the  concluding  words  of  which  were 
a  quotation  from  Euripides.  As  a  young  man 
he  was  fond  of  the  novels  of  Bjornson,  and  he 
is  still  devoted  to  Thackeray —  particularly  to 
"  Pendennis,"  but  he  cares  little  for  current  fic 
tion.  His  favorite  reading  is  history  and  poetry, 
and  in  both  these  fields  his  knowledge  is  wide  and 
exact.  If  one  were  to  single  out  his  favorite  authors 
they  would  probably  be  Burke  and  Macaulay 
among  prose  writers,  and  Homer  and  Virgil, 
Shakespeare  and  Milton  among  the  poets.  His 
memory  is  well  stored  with  striking  passages 
which  he  has  so  well  digested  that  he  uses  them 
in  a  debate  or  conversation  as  naturally  and  fitly 
as  though  he  were  their  author.  It  could  not  be 
said  of  him  as  he  said  of  Charles  Sumner:  — 

He  read  more  than  he  assimilated.  Whatever  he  read 
he  did  not  digest  and  make  his  own,  but  simply  trans 
ferred  it  from  the  book  to  his  head,  and  when  occa 
sion  called  for  its  use  it  would  come  forth  unaffected 
by  its  residence  there. 

Closely  akin  to  Mr.  McCall's  appreciation  of 
the  masterpieces  of  literature  is  his  sense  of  the 
ennobling  influence  of  art  upon  life  and  of  the 
contribution  which  beauty  can  make  to  the  de- 

219 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

velopment  of  the  human  spirit.  When  it  was 
proposed  in  Congress  that  the  national  memorial 
to  Lincoln  should  take  the  form  of  a  Greek 
temple,  the  objection  was  made  that  such  a 
structure  would  serve  no  useful  purpose.  To 
this  Mr.  McCall  replied:  — 

I  am  entirely  willing  to  rest  under  the  scorn  of  gen 
tlemen  who  think  that  we  should  put  everything  in  life 
upon  the  basis  of  efficiency.  I  know  there  are  men 
who  would  think  it  a  mere  waste  of  time  to  carve  an 
Apollo  or  a  Venus,  when  the  same  amount  of  labor 
might  rear  a  hovel  to  shelter  some  human  head;  or  who 
would  regard  the  work  of  a  painter,  spending  weary 
months  of  his  life  in  putting  immortal  tints  upon  can 
vas,  as  a  mere  waste  of  time,  when  he  might  devote  his 
energies  to  painting  many  buildings  and  preserving  them 
against  the  weather.  But  I  have  myself  no  sympathy 
with  this  view.  I  not  only  do  not  regard  it  as  waste  to 
encourage  those  pursuits  which  aim  to  cultivate  and 
satisfy  our  sense  of  beauty,  but  I  believe  they  make  an 
appeal  which  makes  life  richer  and  better  for  all  of  us. 
The  notion  of  mere  efficiency  would  cover  this  world 
of  ours  with  concrete  structures,  built  with  the  most 
nicely  calculated  strains,  and  would  fill  them  up  with 
human  automatons,  each  devoted  to  his  own  narrow 
specialty,  perhaps  of  making  a  boot-heel,  and  chased  by 
fast-flying  machinery  all  through  the  day.  We  might 
produce  more  under  such  a  system,  but  the  individual 
would  be  shrunk.  It  would  make  us  a  race  of  dwarfs, 
and  our  ores  and  coal,  I  believe,  might  better  be  per- 
220 


MR.  McCALL 

mitted  to  remain  in  the  earth's  untouched  bosom.  I 
would  not  have  our  country,  when  the  final  reckoning 
is  to  be  made  between  her  and  other  nations,  have 
nothing  to  present  but  an  abnormally  developed  effi 
ciency,  and  have  that  put  beside  the  painting,  the  sculp 
ture,  the  literature,  the  music,  the  architecture,  and 
those  other  consummate  flowers  of  civilization  which 
other  nations  would  bring.  I  do  not  underestimate  a 
highly  developed  industrial  system,  if  only  there  should 
be  the  more  developed  also  those  higher  and  more  ar 
tistic  expressions  of  the  aspirations  of  our  race,  which 
should  be  the  choicest  possession  of  every  one  of  its 
children. 

It  was  also  said  by  way  of  objection  that  how 
ever  beautiful  a  Greek  temple  might  be  in  itself 
it  was  inappropriate  as  a  memorial  to  Lincoln.  In 
his  reply  to  this  contention  Mr.  McCall  paid  trib 
ute  to  the  surpassing  artistic  genius  of  the  an 
cient  Greeks  and  showed  how  their  architectural 
forms  might  fittingly  be  used  to  commemorate 
the  character  of  Lincoln:  — 

In  whatever  relates  to  artistic  expression,  whether  in 
poetry,  in  eloquence,  in  sculpture,  or  in  architecture,  who 
is  there  in  the  world  who  can  surpass  the  Greek?  What 
more  speaking  marbles  were  ever  carved  than  those  of 
Phidias?  What  strains  of  poetry  have  ever  broken  with 
sweeter  music  on  the  human  ear  than  those  of  Homer 
and  of  Pindar?  Where  else  has  eloquence  reached  the 
chiseled  beauty  of  Demosthenes  ?  And  although  but 

221 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

few  remnants  of  the  architecture  of  the  Greeks  have 
survived  the  hand  of  the  barbarian  and  the  tooth  of  time, 
yet  when  we  come  in  view  of  some  fragments  of  them 
to-day,  broken  though  they  may  be,  and  twenty  cen 
turies  after  their  time,  we  stand  before  them  enthralled 
in  wonder.  There  is  nothing  more  beautiful  in  archi 
tecture  than  the  column  of  the  Greek.  ...  It  illus 
trates  dignity,  beauty,  simplicity,  and  strength.  How 
ever  the  soul  of  Abraham  Lincoln  might  have  been 
chiseled  in  its  shaping,  as  he  came  finally  to  be,  every 
one  of  those  elements  was  represented  in  his  char 
acter. 

Mr.  McCall  is  an  idealist  in  the  sense  that  he 
has  ideals  and  seeks  to  attain  them.  But  he  is  not 
so  visionary  as  to  refuse  to  make  any  advance  at 
all  simply  because  he  cannot  advance  as  far  as  he 
would  like.  Lloyd  George  once  declared  that  the 
chief  part  of  the  activity  of  every  statesman  con 
sists  in  the  arranging  of  compromises.  In  politics 
compromise  is  the  price  which  must  always  be  paid 
for  any  substantial  achievement,  and  so  long  as  the 
achievement  is  in  harmony  with  justifiable  prin 
ciples  compromise  is  legitimate  and  praiseworthy. 
But  Mr.  McCall  has  given  abundant  proof  of  his 
willingness  to  follow  his  convictions  no  matter  at 
what  consequence  to  himself.  When  he  voted 
against  the  resolution  which  precipitated  the  war 
with  Spain,  he  believed  that  his  action  would  cost 
him  his  seat  in  Congress,  and  when  he  reached 

222 


MR.  McCALL 

home  that  night  after  the  adjournment  of  the 
House  he  said  to  Mrs.  McCall,  "  I  have  cut  off 
my  political  head  to-night." 

It  is  one  of  the  fortunate  circumstances  of  Mr. 
McCall's  life  that  in  the  impressionable  years  of 
his  boyhood  and  youth  he  lived  in  two  widely 
differing  sections  of  the  country,  and  thus  acquired 
two  points  of  view.  Such  an  experience  could  not 
but  tend  to  save  him  from  a  provinciality  of  which 
he  might  otherwise  have  been  a  victim,  and  it 
partly  accounts  for  his  ability  to  look  at  impor 
tant  questions  from  the  standpoint  of  the  country 
as  a  whole.  It  is  natural,  therefore,  to  find  that  he 
deprecates  sectionalism.  In  1893  ne  sa^  *n  tne 
House :  — 

An  attempt  has  been  made  in  this  debate  to  draw 
what  is  called  the  "  color  line,"and  to  stir  up  a  sectional 
feeling.  So  far  as  my  constituency  or  the  Commonwealth 
of  Massachusetts  is  concerned,  I  can  say  emphatically 
that  there  is  nothing  but  the  best  of  feeling  towards  the 
South.  Our  scholars  study  her  history ;  they  are  sorry 
at  her  mistakes,  while  they  regard  her  great  deeds  with 
pride  as  a  part  of  the  history  of  the  same  imperial  race 
to  which  they  belong.  Her  merchants  and  capitalists 
would  find  in  the  great  natural  wealth  of  the  South  an 
opportunity  for  that  increase  which  Nature  has  denied 
them  at  their  less  favored  home.  They  would  be  glad  to 
witness  the  offspring  of  the  happy  union  between  the 
surplus  wealth  of  one  section  and  the  abundant  natural 

223 


SAMUEL  W.  MC€ALL 

resources  of  the  other.  Not  less  grateful  to  their  eyes 
than  to  yours  would  be  the  spectacle  of  new  temples  of 
industry  lifting  their  spires  to  the  Southern  sky,  of  your 
wonderful  mineral  wealth  being  unbarred  to  the  sun 
light  of  your  fair  slopes,  u  rich  in  crops  and  rich  in 
heroes." 

The  one  principle  which  more  than  any  other 
has  shaped  Mr.  McCall's  public  career  is  his  de 
votion  to  liberty,  —  but  not  to  liberty  as  a  thing 
which  the  powers  that  be  may  grant  or  take  away  as 
they  deem  it  expedient,  but  to  liberty  as  a  birth 
right  equally  sacred  with  life.  The  unrestrained 
freedom  of  his  boyhood  on  the  prairies  of  Illinois 
may  have  had  something  to  do  with  his  impatience 
with  the  multiplicity  of  statutes  which  threaten 
our  liberty,  and  this  impatience  has  found  a  more 
solid  basis  in  his  study  of  history  and  in  his  ob 
servation  of  the  dwarfing  effect  produced  upon 
individual  character  by  an  excess  of  govermental 
regulation. 

As  the  youthful  editor  of  a  college  paper  he 
protested  against  the  prevailing  excess  of  legisla 
tion,  and  forty-two  years  later  he  returned  to  this 
theme,  and  with  great  amplification  of  detail  he 
made  it  the  subject  of  the  Dodge  lectures  delivered 
at  Yale  University  under  the  title  "The  Liberty 
of  Citizenship,"  the  central  thought  of  which 
was  expressed  in  this  sentence  :  — 
224 


MR.  McCALL 

Let  us  regard  it  as  one  of  the  first  duties  of  citizen 
ship  to  aid  in  checking  the  rapidity  and  greed  with  which 
the  laws  are  coming  to  devour  liberty. 

In  thus  emphasizing  the  idea  of  liberty,  Mr. 
McCall  has  in  mind  the  concrete  and  personal 
liberty  of  the  individual  rather  than  the  nebu 
lous  liberty  of  the  group  to  which  the  individual 
belongs.  It  is  only  by  protecting  the  individual 
that  the  group  can  be  protected.  A  free  com 
munity  in  which  the  individual  is  not  free  is  a 
contradiction  in  terms.  The  Roman  conception 
of  the  relation  of  the  individual  to  the  state,  so 
antagonistic  to  the  history  of  freedom  among  men 
of  English  speech,  receives  no  support  from  Mr. 
McCall. 

When  I  speak  of  the  individual,  I  mean  the  chief 
thing  that  is  essential  in  the  meaning  of  the  term  "  the 
people."  I  do  not  accept  the  latter  term  in  the  sense 
in  which  it  is  so  often  sweetly  used  by  those  who  de 
sire  our  votes.  I  am  unable  to  see  how  any  good,  com 
ing  to  a  mass  of  men,  can  be  felt  in  any  other  way  than 
by  the  individuals  in  the  mass.  And  until  somebody 
shall  point  out  a  higher  consciousness  than  that  of  the 
individual  man  or  woman  or  child,  he  can  hardly  be 
heard  to  deny  that  the  individual  man  or  woman  or 
child  is  the  ultimate  concern  of  the  state.  .  .  . 

The  notion  that  there  is  a  collective  personality  called 
"  the  people,"  separated  from  the  individuals  who  com 
pose  it,  and  which  may  be  used  to  oppress  each  one  and 

225 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

all  of  its  component  parts  in  turn,  may  well  have  been 
a  conception  of  the  Greek  demagogues  by  whom  it  was 
so  fittingly  illustrated  in  practice.  I  cannot  understand 
how  there  can  be  any  freedom  that  is  not  in  the  last 
analysis  individual  freedom.  However  great  a  mass  of 
men  you  may  have  in  a  nation,  however  powerful  phys 
ically  it  may  be,  if  each  individual  is  the  victim  of  op 
pression,  if  he  is  denied  rights,  if  there  is  no  forum  open 
to  him,  where  he  can  be  heard  to  say  against  the  majority, 
"this  is  mine'*  —  then  "the  people"  have  no  such 
thing  as  liberty,  they  have  no  such  thing  as  popular 
rights.  As  to  the  "  composite  citizen,"  he  obviously  is 
nobody  who  ever  has  existed,  or  ever  will  exist.  When 
the  advocates  of  a  reform,  ignoring  the  man  of  flesh  and 
blood  in  the  street,  are  conducting  it  with  reference  to 
this  mythical  person,  they  should  emigrate  to  Utopia. 

Mr.  McCall's  life  and  thought  are  so  perme 
ated  with  the  idea  of  liberty  as  a  right  inherent 
in  every  man  as  to  make  it  inevitable  that  his  re 
lations  with  others  should  be  characterized  by 
great  tolerance.  Years  ago  Phillips  Brooks  an 
swered  the  charge  that  tolerance  in  religion  was 
only  another  name  for  indifference  by  showing 
that  real  tolerance  can  proceed  only  from  convic 
tion.  Herein  lies  the  explanation  of  Mr.  McCall's 
tolerance  of  opinions  and  courses  of  action  which 
are  most  repugnant  to  him.  It  proceeds  from  his 
recognition  of  liberty  as  a  supreme  human  right. 
So  sincere  is  his  recognition  of  the  right  of  every 
226 


MR.  McCALL 

man  to  be  himself, so  long  as  he  does  not  interfere 
with  a  like  right  in  others,  that  he  instinctively 
puts  all  men  upon  an  equal  plane  and  approaches 
them  without  any  assumption  of  superiority.  And 
this  is  the  basis  of  his  democracy.  To  him  de 
mocracy  does  not  appear  as  a  political  theory 
based  upon  expediency,  but  as  a  right  inherent 
in  mankind.  "  The  simple  majesty  of  manhood" 
is  a  phrase  which  occurs  in  many  of  his  speeches. 
One  who  regards  manhood  as  majestic  cannot  be 
other  than  a  firm  believer  in  both  liberty  and 
democracy. 

Somewhere  Mr.  McCall  refers  to  Lincoln  as 
an  illustration  of  the  "  chivalry  of  democracy." 
This  phrase  goes  far  to  explain  Mr.  McCall's 
political  philosophy  as  well  as  his  conception  of 
the  dignity  of  humanity.  That  democracy  can  be 
chivalrous  will  seem  to  many  to  be  a  contradiction 
in  terms,  while  others,  in  spite  of  the  present-day 
exaltation  of  Lincoln,  will  find  it  difficult  to  as 
sociate  him  with  the  mediaeval  knight  whose  lofty 
vows  of  devotion  to 

Truthe  and  honour,  freedom  and  curtesie 

did  not  involve  any  idea  of  obligation  to  those 
who  were  not  of  gentle  blood.  Chivalry  and  de 
mocracy,  however,  have  this  much  in  common, 
-  that  they  cherish  ideals  the  mere  profession  of 

227 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

which  is  an  incentive  to  their  attainment,  and 
those  ideals  look  to  the  protection  of  the  weak 
and  the  restraint  of  the  strong  and  the  establish 
ment  of  righteousness  in  the  relations  of  men 
with  one  another.  Both  chivalry  and  democracy, 
in  so  far  as  they  are  a  social  philosophy,  repre 
sent  conceptions  of  service,  —  the  former  through 
the  dedication  of  an  individual  to  the  protection 
of  a  class,  the  latter  through  the  organized  effort 
of  the  community  to  protect  and  cherish  each  of 
its  members,  and  to  open  wide  to  all  every  door 
of  opportunity.  Mr.  McCall's  phrase  was  there 
fore  not  only  a  graceful  tribute  to  Lincoln,  but 
was  a  compact  statement  of  the  principle  which 
justifies  democracy,  and  which  his  own  life  so  well 
exemplifies.  At  the  beginning  of  his  legislative 
career  he  was  identified  with  such  chivalrous  and 
humanitarian  measures  as  the  abolition  of  impris 
onment  for  debt,  the  protection  of  the  wages  of 
sailors,  and  the  preservation  of  the  purity  of  the 
ballot  through  the  regulation  of  the  use  of  money 
in  elections.  Later,  as  a  member  of  Congress,  he 
was  actuated  by  the  same  chivalrous  and  human 
itarian  motives  in  proposing  an  amendment  to 
the  Federal  Constitution  authorizing  Congress  to 
regulate  hours  of  labor,  particularly  of  women 
and  children,  throughout  the  United  States.  And 
now,  as  Governor  of  Massachusetts,  he  is  en- 
228 


MR.  McCALL 

gaged  in  the  same  chivalrous  enterprise  in  his 
endeavor  to  obtain  a  revision  of  the  constitution 
of  the  State,  the  protection  of  the  poor  against 
the  exactions  of  loan  sharks,  and  the  limitation 
of  the  hours  of  labor  in  industries  which  are 
operated  continuously. 

Where  snobbery  is,  there  can  be  no  true  de 
mocracy.  Men's  position  in  the  world  will  neces 
sarily  be  helped  or  hindered  by  the  environment 
into  which  they  are  born,  but  the  worth  of  their 
achievements  is  not  to  be  gauged  by  such  an 
accident.  Allusion  has  already  been  made  to  the 
fact  that  in  Mr.  McCall's  first  campaign  for  Con 
gress  his  opponents  made  much  of  the  circum 
stance  that  their  candidate  was  a  son  of  the  great 
War  Governor  of  Massachusetts,  John  A.  An 
drew.  Mr.  McCall  reminded  them  that  Gov 
ernor  Andrew  came  to  Boston  from  Maine,  a 
poor  boy  who  had  to  fight  his  way  without  the 
help  of  family  prestige,  and  that  those  who  now 
sought  to  win  votes  for  his  son  because  of  the 
achievements  of  the  father  represented  the  same 
social  element  against  which  Governor  Andrew 
himself  had  to  win  his  way.  To  advocate  a  man's 
election  to  office  because  his  father  had  held  a  dis 
tinguished  place  was  to  revert,  in  Mr.  McCall's 
judgment,  to  the  very  system  which  our  ancestors 
came  to  this  country  to  escape.  Such  an  appli- 

229 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

cation  of  heredity  was  repugnant  to  his  idea  of 
democracy. 

A  citizen  of  Boston  prepared  a  "  Literary  His 
tory  of  America  "  in  which  he  carefully  recorded 
that  Theodore  Parker  and  William  Lloyd  Garri 
son  "  sprang  from  that  lower  class  of  New  Eng 
land  which  never  intimately  understood  its  social 
superiors  ";  that  Benjamin  Franklin  "  sprang  from 
socially  inconspicuous  origin  "  ;  that  "  the  lower 
class  of  New  England  produced  Whittier  "  ;  that 
Thoreau's  blood  was  "  not  of  the  socially  distin 
guished  kind"  ;  that  Irving  "was  of  simple  ori 
gin"  and  that  "his  family  was  in  respectable 
trade  "  ;  and  that  Daniel  Webster  was  the  "  son 
of  a  New  Hampshire  countryman"  and  "re 
tained  so  many  traces  of  his  far  from  eminent 
New  Hampshire  origin"  as  to  be  less  typical  of 
the  Boston  orators  than  were  some  other  men. 
As  to  this  reproach  against  Webster  Mr.  McCall 
said :  — 

It  is  hardly  useful  to  turn  to  a  doubtful  past  in  order 
to  learn  of  a  known  present,  or  to  judge  of  a  son  whom 
we  know  well  from  a  father  of  whom  we  know  little. 
It  it  often  more  safe  to  judge  of  the  ancestor  from  the 
descendant  than  of  the  descendant  from  the  ancestor. 
I  supposed  that  Daniel  Webster  had  forever  settled  the 
essential  character  of  the  stock  from  which  he  sprang, 
just  as  the  pure  gold  of  Lincoln's  character  unerringly 
230 


MR.  McCALL 

points  to  a  mine  of  unalloyed  metal  somewhere,  if  there 
is  anything  in  the  principles  of  heredity;  and  whether 
the  mine  is  known  or  unknown,  its  gold  will  pass  cur 
rent  even  at  the  Boston  mint. 

His  democracy  has  been  expressed  in  his  atti 
tude  toward  legislation  which  discriminated  be 
tween  men  before  the  law  because  of  race  or 
color.  In  an  early  debate  on  the  merit  system  in 
the  public  service  he  said  :  — 

The  gentleman  from  Mississippi  [Mr.  Williams] 
complains  that  in  his  State  there  were  actually  in  the 
postal  service  eleven  colored  people,  or  to  use  his  forc 
ible  if  not  elegant  language,  "  eleven  ignorant  niggers  " 
in  the  State  of  Mississippi  were  employed  in  the  Rail 
way  Mail  Service. 

To  my  mind  one  of  the  glories  of  this  civil-service 
reform  is  that  it  does  not  regard  a  man's  color,  but  that 
to  rich  and  poor,  to  black  and  white,  to  high  and  low, 
it  applies  impartially  the  same  test.  It  does  not  look  to 
see  what  political  boss  is  behind  a  man,  or  what  pull 
he  has,  or  what  may  be  his  circumstances  in  life,  but 
it  regards  him  and  his  qualifications,  and  aims  to  give 
him  the  place  he  is  competent  to  fill. 

In  1893,  in  discussing  a  bill  which  provided 
that  in  certain  classes  of  cases  the  facts  should  be 
established  "  by  at  least  one  credible  witness  other 
than  Chinese/*  he  said:  — 

Truth  knows  no  color.  Let  the  court  find  it  as  best 
it  may.  It  is  a  most  heathenish  principle  to  write  in 

231 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

our  laws  that  our  courts  shall  shut  their  eyes  to  facts 
because  of  a  man's  nationality  or  the  color  of  his  skin. 

In  the  debate  in  the  House,  in  1911,  on  a 
resolution  to  abrogate  our  treaty  with  Russia 
because  of  discrimination  against  American  citi 
zens  of  Jewish  descent,  he  said:  — 

My  sympathies  are  with  this  brilliant  race.  Centuries 
ago  its  nationality  was  destroyed  in  Palestine.  It  was 
dispersed  over  the  face  of  the  globe.  The  laws  of  almost 
all  nations  have  discriminated  against  it ;  and  yet  it  has 
shown  such  marvelous  vitality  that  it  has  made  for  it 
self  a  proud  place.  It  is  to-day  one  of  the  most  power 
ful  elements  in  great  States  in  this  Union.  I  should  be 
willing  to  take  any  steps  in  reason  to  protect  the  rights 
of  such  a  people. 

While  Mr.  McCall  was  in  Congress,  he  was 
not  a  frequent  participant  in  the  debates.  Aside 
from  the  formal  presentation  of  the  reports  of 
committees  over  which  he  presided,  he  seldom 
addressed  the  House,  even  briefly,  more  than  a 
half-dozen  times  in  any  one  session.  Indeed, 
throughout  one  session  when  he  was  chairman 
of  an  investigating  committee  of  the  House,  he  did 
not  take  the  floor  at  all.  It  was  the  high  quality 
of  his  speeches,  the  thorough  knowledge  upon 
which  they  were  based,  the  sound  and  independ 
ent  judgment  which  they  exhibited,  as  well  as 
their  eloquent  and  graceful  language,  which 
232 


MR.  McCALL 

gained  public  recognition.  His  speeches  also  are 
distinguished  by  the  fact  that  they  usually  dealt 
with  the  fundamental.  His  discussions  of  public 
questions  well  exemplify  Lord  Macaulay's  ob 
servation  that  in  the  administration  of  govern 
ment  there  are  two  kinds  of  wisdom,  —  the 
highest  wisdom  which  is  conversant  with  great 
principles  of  political  philosophy  and  a  lower 
wisdom  which  meets  daily  exigencies  by  daily 
expedients.  In  his  first  speech  on  the  tariff  he 
examined  the  fundamental  principle  on  which 
the  whole  policy  of  protection  is  based.  In  his 
discussion  of  the  amendments  made  by  the  Sen 
ate  to  revenue  bills  sent  to  it  from  the  House, 
he  concerned  himself  less  with  the  details  of  the 
amendments  than  with  the  constitutional  right 
of  the  Senate  to  make  any  alterations  which 
affected  the  fundamental  character  of  the  bill.  In 
his  view  the  power  over  revenue  bills  vested  in  the 
House  by  the  Constitution  was  something  more 
than  a  right  to  adopt  an  enacting  clause  to  which 
the  Senate  might  attach  any  sort  of  bill  that  it 
chose.  Likewise,  in  the  debates  upon  the  Philip 
pines,  he  emphasized  less  the  transitory  elements 
of  the  problem  —  the  economic  effect  upon  the 
United  States,  the  expense  which  their  posses 
sion  would  entail,  the  possible  advantages  to  the 
Philippines  —  than  the  fundamental  question  as 

233 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

to  whether  a  country  whose  national  existence  is 
based  upon  the  principle  that  all  just  government 
derives  its  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  gov 
erned,  can  be  justified  in  imposing  its  rule  upon 
an  unwilling  population.  Throughout  the  debate 
upon  the  regulation  of  railway  rates,  he  insisted 
that  the  question  as  to  what  is  a  reasonable  rate 
is  essentially  a  judicial  question.  The  many  de 
cisions  which  have  since  been  handed  down  to 
the  effect  that  the  rate  decrees  of  a  railway  com 
mission  cannot  be  made  final  and  that  a  carrier 
cannot  be  deprived  of  its  right  to  a  judicial  re 
view  of  the  action  of  a  commission,  go  far  to 
sustain  Mr.  McCall's  contention,  while  the  in 
congruity  of  the  Government's  fixing  the  price 
of  what  the  railways  have  to  sell  while  it  makes 
no  attempt  to  fix  the  price  of  what  they  have  to 
buy  is  forcing  itself  more  and  more  upon  the 
attention  of  students  of  the  railway  problem.  It 
is  this  habit  of  exact  analysis  and  of  resolving  a 
question  into  its  fundamental  elements  which  is 
Mr.  McCall's  most  prominent  characteristic  as 
a  debater. 

An  examination  of  his  speeches  in  Congress 
will  show  that  his  discussions  were  usually  con 
fined  to  those  questions  the  decision  of  which  he 
felt  was  likely  to  affect  our  whole  system  of  gov 
ernment.  On  the  great  mass  of  petty  bills  which 

234 


MR.  McCALL 

come  before  Congress  he  seldom  had  anything 
to  say.  He  devoted  himself  to  the  study  of  such 
questions  as  free  silver,  the  merit  system  of  ap 
pointments,  the  policy  of  protection,  imperial 
ism,  the  regulation  of  railway  rates,  and  the  con 
stitutional  relations  of  the  States  with  the  Federal 
Government  and  of  the  various  branches  of  the 
Government  with  one  another.  And  he  is  carry 
ing  the  same  principle  of  selection  into  the  dis 
charge  of  his  duties  as  Governor.  Shortly  before 
his  inauguration,  he  said  to  a  friend,  "  I  don't 
want  to  be  a  mere  routine  Governor.  I  want 
to  accomplish  something  substantial  for  the 
State." 

Religion  is  often  the  key  to  much  of  a  man's 
character,  but  if  he  is  as  little  inclined  as  is  Mr. 
McCall  to  speak  of  those  things  which  concern 
himself  most  intimately,  it  is  a  phase  of  his  life 
which  is  likely  to  be  little  known.  So  far  as  Mr. 
McCall's  religion  finds  any  outward  expression, 
it  is  as  a  communicant  of  the  Episcopal  Church 
of  which  he  and  all  his  family  are  members.  To 
his  intimates  it  is  apparent  that  the  serenity  of 
his  spirit  is  largely  due  to  an  almost  mystical  con 
fidence  in  the  guidance  of  a  power  which  shapes 
his  life  and  brings  to  good  result  that  which 
seemed  at  the  time  a  defeat  of  his  purpose.  In 
his  speeches  and  writings  there  are  few  sentences 

235 


SAMUEL  W.  McCALL 

of  a  distinctly  religious  character,  but  they  are 
pervaded  by  a  reverential  tone  which  could  only 
proceed  from  a  deeply  religious  nature.  Many 
of  his  discussions  of  public  questions  might  well 
have  had  for  their  text,  "  Righteousness  exalteth 
a  nation."  He  is  so  impressed  with  the  sacred- 
ness  of  democracy  and  the  inalienable  right  of 
man  to  liberty  that  his  pleas  attain  a  solemnity 
comparable  to  Lincoln's  Second  Inaugural  or  to 
that  of  the  Hebrew  prophets  or  the  Greek  tra 
gedians.  Wherein  such  appeals  to  the  highest 
emotions  by  which  the  conduct  of  man  is  influ 
enced  differ  from  appeals  to  religion  it  might  be 
difficult  to  determine.  The  result  is  certainly 
much  the  same. 

In  Mr.  McCall's  library  in  Winchester  there 
is  a  picture  with  an  interesting  history.  When 
the  treaty  for  the  exclusion  of  the  Chinese  was 
pending  before  the  Senate,  Senator  Hoar,  to 
whom  anything  in  the  nature  of  racial  discrimi 
nation  before  the  law  was  abhorrent,  vigorously 
opposed  its  ratification,  but  on  the  final  vote,  he 
found  himself  absolutely  alone.  He  evidently 
felt  the  isolation  of  his  position,  and  in  reaching 
out  for  sympathy  he  instinctively  turned  to  his  col 
league  in  the  lower  House.  In  the  evening  of  the 
day  that  the  treaty  was  ratified,  the  Senator's  mes 
senger  appeared  at  Mr.  McCall's  home  bearing 

236 


MR.  McCALL 

a  beautiful  engraving  of  Trumbull's  well-known 
painting,  "  The  Signing  of  the  Declaration  of 
Independence."  On  the  margin  was  written, 
"  The  Hon.  Samuel  W.  McCall,  semper  fidelis, 
with  the  affectionate  regards  of  George  F.  Hoar." 


THE   END 


INDEX 


Adams,  Charles  Francis,  41. 
Adams,  John,  59. 
Adams,  John  Quincy,  60. 
Aiken,  John  A.,  II,  13. 
Andrew,  John  A.,  4,  27,  229. 

Bankruptcy,  64-66. 

Barrett,  William  E.,  23. 

Bartlett,  Paul,  32. 

Blaine,  James  G.,  139. 

Brooks,  Phillips,  226. 

Bryan,  W.  J.,  53,  98,  129. 

Bryce,  Lord,  68,  147,  189,  108. 

Burke,  Edmund,  84,  210. 

Burnham,  D.  H.,  32. 

«'  Business  of  Congress,"  197. 

Cannon,  Joseph  G.,  34-37. 

Carlisle,  John  G.,  1 1 6. 

Centralization  of  power,  81-89, 
97- 

Chase,  Dr.  George  C.,  9. 

Chase,  Salmon  P.,  173. 

Choate,  Rufus,  173. 

Civil  service  reform,  57-64,  231. 

Clay,  Henry,  6l. 

Cleveland,  Grover,  47,  48,  53)  95  > 
101,  116,  118,  146. 

Constitution  of  the  United  States,  con 
struction  of,  80,  83,  90;  amend 
ment  of,  89,  97,  99  ;  restraints  of, 
89,  94,  100,  106-08. 

Constitutional  relations  of  the  Federal 
Government  and  the  States,  55—57, 
69,  81-90,  93,  97,  99. 

Corrupt  practices  acts,  24. 

Cuba,  relations  with,  126,  145,  167- 
71. 

Curtis,  George  William,  57. 


Dartmouth  "Anvil,"  13-16. 

Dartmouth  College,  9,  1 1  ;  presi 
dency  of,  172-88  ;  growth  of,  173  j 
in  the  Civil  War,  175  ;  develop 
ment  under  President  Tucker,  1 75  j 
Webster  celebration,  209. 

Demagogues,  danger  of,  94. 

Democracy,  227—32. 

Dingley  Act,  122,  128,  129,  134. 

Draper,  General  William  F.,  214. 

Eastman,  Edwin  G.,  1 1. 
Eliot,  Charles  W.,  40,  77. 
Elkins  Act,  72. 
Emancipation,  193-95,  197. 
Episcopal  Church,  235. 
Everett,  William,  52. 

Federal   Government,  supremacy  of, 

99- 

Fine  Arts,  National  Commission  on, 

32- 

Franklin,  Benjamin,  96,  189,  209. 
Freeman,  E.  A.,  93. 
French,  Daniel  Chester,  32. 

Garfield,  James  A.,  101. 
Gladstone,  W.  E.,  90. 
Gold  standard,  50,  51,  54. 
Grant,  U.  S.,  96. 

Hamilton,  Alexander,  209,  212-14. 
Hanna,  M.  A.,  129. 
Harrison,  Benjamin,  57,  1 1 6,  158. 
Hay,  John,  189,  191. 
Hepburn  Act,  72-76. 
Higginson,  Henry  L. ,  1 80. 
Higginson,  Thomas  Wentworth,  1 87, 
205. 

239 


INDEX 


Hoar,  George  F.,  236. 

Holmes,  Justice  O.  W.,  113. 

House  or  Representatives,  rearrange 
ment  of  its  hall,  68;  right  to  orig 
inate  revenue  bills,  100—03;  power 
in  abrogation  of  treaties,  103-06. 

Illinois,  life  in,  3-8,   191. 
Income  Tax  Amendment,  97-99. 
Ingersoll,  Robert  G.,  1 1 6. 
Initiative,  109,  in. 
Interstate  Commerce  Act,  71. 
Ireland,  1 60. 

Jackson,  Andrew,  59,  60,  6a. 
James,  William,  205. 
Jefferson,  Thomas,  59,  62. 
Jews,  protection  of,  232. 
John  Brown's  raid,  205—08. 
Judiciary,  independence  of,  95,  Hi. 

Kimball-Union  Academy,  16,  17. 

Labor,  regulation  of  hours  of,  69. 
Legal  tender  notes,   proposal  to  tax, 

55-57- 

Lewis,  Homer  P.,  12. 
Liberty,  85,  86,    89,   91,    93,    112, 

161,  208,  224-27. 
"  Liberty  of  Citizenship,"  208,  224. 
Lieber,  Francis,  85. 
Lincoln,   Abraham,    81,    193,    197, 

209,  222,  227. 
Lincoln  Memorial,  33,  22O. 
Lodge,  H.  C.,  190. 

McCall,  Henry,  a. 

McCall,  Peter,  i. 

McCall,  Samuel,  Jr.,  i. 

McCall,  Samuel  Walker,  birth,  2  ; 
removal  to  Illinois,  3  ;  enters  Mt. 
Carroll  Seminary,  8  ;  enters  New 
Hampton  Academy,  8  5  impres 
sions  of  New  England,  8  ;  enters 
Dartmouth  College,  9,  II;  elected 
to  Phi  Beta  Kappa,  II  ;  member 
of  Kappa  Kappa  Kappa,  1 2 ;  in 

240 


debating,  12;  in  boating,  12;  in 
college  journalism,  13-16;  teacher 
in  Kimball-Union  Academy,  16; 
in  a  night  school,  1 7  ;  study  and 
practice  of  law,  19  ;  life  of  Napo 
leon,  19;  articles  on  Sumnerand 
Choate,  20;  "  Plea  for  a  Strong 
Navy,"  20;  elected  to  the  Legis 
lature  of  Massachusetts,  22,  23, 
26;  author  of  poor  debtors'  law, 
22;  member  of  Republican  National 
Convention,  23;  editor  of  "  Boston 
Advertiser,"  23;  author  of  corrupt 
practices  acts,  24,  26;  controversy 
with  Supreme  Judicial  Court,  245 
law  for  protection  of  sailors'  wages, 
25;  appointed  Ballot  Law  Commis 
sioner,  26;  elected  to  Congress,  28; 
independence,  28;  large  majorities, 
29,  30;  election  of  1904,  29;  mem 
ber  of  Committee  on  Elections,  315 
member  of  Committee  on  the  Judici 
ary,  32;  author  of  law  establishing 
National  Commission  on  the  Fine 
Arts,  32;  memberof  the  Lincoln  Me 
morial  Commission,  33;  member  of 
Committee  on  Ways  and  Means, 
33,  122;  member  of  investigating 
committees,  33  ;  relations  with 
Speaker  Cannon,  34—37;  retires 
from  the  House,  37;  candidacy  for 
the  Senate,  39-41;  farewell  address 
to  the  House,  42;  candidate  for 
Governor,  44;  renomination,  45; 
election,  46;  repeal  of  the  Silver 
Purchase  Act,  47-53;  defense  of 
the  public  credit,  54;  taxation  of 
legal  tender  notes,  55-57;  uniform 
ity  of  State  laws,  57;  civil  service 
reform,  57-64;  bankruptcy,  64- 
68;  rearrangement  of  hall  of  House 
of  Representives,  68;  constitutional 
amendment  to  secure  uniform  hours 
of  labor,  69;  railway  rate  legislation, 
70—76;  performing  the  functions  of 
an  opposition,  77;  constitutional  dis 
cussions,  78-1-14.;  the  policy  of  pro- 


INDEX 


tcction,  1 1 5-44;  the  warwith  Spain 
and  its  problems,  145-71;  presi 
dency  of  Dartmouth  College,  1 72- 
88 ;  as  a  man  of  letters,  189-216; 
scholarly  tastes,  218;  appreciation 
of  art,  219-22;  idealism,  2,22;  dep 
recates  sectionalism,  223;  devotion 
to  liberty,  224-27;  an  individualist 
and  a  democrat,  227—32;  opposes 
race  discriminations,  231;  speeches 
devoted  to  fundamental  principles, 
232-34;  a  communicant  of  the 
Episcopal  Church,  235;  gift  from 
Senator  Hoar,  236. 

McCall,  Mrs.  Samuel  W.,  IO. 

McCall,  William,  i. 

McKinley,  William,  139,  146,  147, 
149,  150. 

McKinley  Act,  134. 

Meservey,  Dr.,  9. 

Monroe  Doctrine,  155. 

Montesquieu,  95. 

Morrow,  J.  B.,  35. 

Navy,  plea  for  a  strong,  20. 
Negroes,  attitude  toward,   181,  231. 
"  Newspaper  Press,"  199-203. 
New  York  "Nation,"  132. 
New  York  "Sun,"  130,  182. 
New  York  "Times,"  39. 

Olmsted,  F.  L.,  32. 

Olney,  Richard,   179. 

Oregon,  direct  government  in,  no. 

Parkman,  Henry,  23. 

Parsons,  Frank  N.,  12,  13. 

Payne  Act,  132-34. 

Phi  Beta  Kappa,  II,  199. 

Philippines,  149,    150-57,    162-66, 

233- 

Poor  debtors,  act  for  relief  of,  22. 
Porto  Rico,  149,  157-61. 
Powers,  Samuel  L.,  12,  13,  17,  1 8. 
Preparedness,  20. 
Protection,  policy  of,  115-44. 
Public  opinion,  84. 


Quimby,  Charles  E.,  I». 

Railways,  regulation  of,  70-76,  234. 

Rand,  Professor,  9. 

Randall,  Samuel  J.,  116. 

Recall,   112. 

Reciprocity,  134;  with  Cuba,    135- 

37,  168-71;   with  Canada,   137- 

44- 

Reed,  Thomas  B.,  146,192,  195-97. 
Referendum,  no,  in. 
Religion,  235. 
Revenue  bills,  authority  of  the  House 

over,  100—03. 
Rhodes,  James  Ford,  181. 
Roberts,    Brigham    H.,    exclusion  of 

from  the  House,  106—08. 
Roosevelt,  Theodore,  29,  30,  58,  72, 

in,  189. 
Root,  Elihu,  1 08,  208. 

Sailors,  act  for  protection  of,  25. 

"  Scholar  in  Politics  a  Conservative," 

203-05. 

Schurz,  Carl,  57. 
Senate  and  House,  relations  between, 

100-06. 

Senators,  popular  election  of,  99. 
Ship  subsidies,  66-68. 
Silver  Purchase    Act,  repeal  of,  47- 

53- 

Smith,  Goldwin,  187. 

Spain,     war     with,     128,     145—71, 

222. 

Springfield  "Republican,"  41. 
States,  rights  and  powers  of,  81. 
Stevens,  Thaddeus,  173,  192. 
Storey,  Moorfield,  182. 
Streeter,  Frank  S.,  12,  183. 

Taft,  William  H.,  139,  166,  208. 

Tariff,  revision  of,  117,  129,  131. 

Thompson,  Ella  Esther  (Mrs.  Mc 
Call),  10. 

Thompson,  Sumner  Shaw,  10. 

Treaties,  making  and  abrogation  of, 
104-06. 

241 


INDEX 


Tucker,    William    J.,     175,     176, 

177. 

Uniform  state  laws,  57. 

Washington,   George,    59,    62,    89, 
95,  120,  197,  209,  212-14. 


Washington  "Post,"  154. 
Webster,  Daniel,  n,  61,  173,209- 

12. 

Wilson,  William  L.,  117. 
Wilson       Bill,      117,      118,      121, 

134- 
Woodford,  Stewart  L.,  146,  147. 


Hitoettfibe 

CAMBRIDGE  .  MASSACHUSETTS 
U    .    S    .   A 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


LD21A-60m-2,'67 
(H241slO)476B 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


3429 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CAUFORNIA  LIBRARY 


